17?        ' 

kNo.  ,^£3  Case 

PRESENTED  TO  THE 


if  .  tf} 


Theos  Kai  Themis. 
TRINITY    COLLEGE,   N.  C. 


H 

W 

> 

p 

w 

2 

D 
Q 


^5s 


^ 


<^ 


I 


\  **      -Y*     V     %. 


V 


i**1 


f 


♦ 

*? 


\ 


THE 

ERRORS 

OF 

HOPKINSIANISM 

DETECTED  AND  REFUTED. 

IN 

SIX  LETTERS 

TO  THE  REV,  S.  WILLISTOX, 

£iSTOR  OF  THE  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH   IN  DURHAM,  V.  T 


BY    NATHAN    BANGS, 

MINISTER  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 


Buy    the  Truth  and  sell  it  not. — Prov,   xxiii.  23. 


NEW-YORK : 

PUBLISHED    BY  D.  HITT  AND  T.   WARE,  FOR  THE 

METHODIST  CONNEXION  IN  THE  U.  STATES. 

J.  C.  Totten,  printer. 

1815. 


District  of  J\'ew-Yorkt  to  rait: 

r>s*~\  13  E  it  remembered,  that  on  the  sixth  day  of  Oc- 
C.  ~  ")  MJ  tober,  in  the  fortieth  year  of  the  Independence 
£  3  of  the   United  States  of  America,    Nathan   Bangs, 

v^^  of  the  said  district,  hath  deposited  in  this  office,  the 
title  of  a  book,  the  right  whereof  he  claims  as  author,  in  the 
word?  following-,  to  wit: 

"  The  Errors  of  Hopkinsianism  detected  and  refuted,  in  Six 
Letters  to  the  Rev.  S.  Wilhston,  Pastor  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  in  Durham,  N.  Y.  By  Nathan  Bang's,  Minister  of  the 
Gospel.     Buy  the  truth  and  sell  it  not.  Prov.  xxiii.  2  J." 

In  conformity  to  the  act  of  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  entitled  "  an  Act  for  the  encouragement  of  Learning, 
by  securing  the  copies  of  Maps,  Charts,  and  Books,  to  the  Au- 
thors and  proprietors  of  such  copies  during  the  times  there- 
in mentioned,"  and  also  to  an  act,  entitled  "  An  act  supple- 
mentary to  an  Act,  entitled  an  Act  for  the  encouragement 
of  Learning,  by  securing  the  copies  of  Maps.  Charts  and  Books 
to  the  authors  and  proprietors  of  such  copies,  during  the 
times  therein  mentioned,  and  extending  the  benefits  thereof 
to  the  arts  of  Designing  Engraving,  and  Etching,  Historical 
and  other  prints." 

THERON   RUDD, 
Clerk  of  the  Southern  District  of  New-York. 


TO    THE 


MINISTERS  AND  PREACHERS, 


COMFOSING     THE 


New-York  Annual  Conference, 

The  following  work  is  respectfully  and 
affectionately  inscribed,  as  a  tribute  of 
gratitude  for  the  invaluable  privileges  the 
Author  has  enjoyed,  and  still  enjoys,  as  a 
member  of  your  body  ;  and  as  a  testimo- 
ny of  his  cordial  union  with  you,  in  striv- 
ing to  promote  the  glorious  cause  of  Chris- 
fianity. 

THE  AUTHOR. 


9i 


8436 


PREFACE. 


JL  HE  following  letters  are  entitled,  "  The  Errors 
of  Hopkinsianism  detected  and  refuted,"  not  be- 
cause Mr.  Williston  has  adopted  every  part  of  that 
system,  nor  because  all  its  errors  are  here  exposed  : 
but  because  he  apparently  agrees  with  the  Hopkin- 
sian  system  in  some  of  its  most  prominent  features, 
and  because  those  features  especially  are  noticed. 
In  regard  to  original  sin,  if  I  understand  their  mean- 
ing, he  evidently  differs  from  the  Hopkinsians ; 
for  Dr.  Emmons,  who  was  a  celebrated  Hopkinsian 
writer,  says,  "  Adam  conveyed  neither  sin,  nor 
guilt,  nor  moral  depravity  to  his  descendants,  by  his 
first  transgression."*  But  Mr.  W.  supposes  total 
depravity  to  consist  in  the  sinfulness  of  our  natures, 

*  This  quotation  and  others  which  I  have  made  from 
Hopkinsian  writers,  are  borrowed  from  a  work  called,  "  Con- 
trast between  Calvinism  and  Hopkinsianism."  Seepage  71. 
I  take  it  for  granted,  that  the  author  has  given  a  faith- 
ful representation  of  their  sentiments,  as  he  has  made  copi- 
ous extracts,  professedly  in  their  own  words.  The  few  pas- 
sages I  have  transcribed,  are  as  I  find  them  in  his  book,  net 
having,  at  present,  access  to  the  originals. 

a    9 


218436 


vi  PREFACE. 

which  we  bring  into  the  world  with  us,  see.  p.  30, 
31,  of  his  book.  On  the  doctrine  of  Foreordina- 
tion.  Eternal  decrees,  Election  and  Reprobation, 
God's  being  the  efficient  cause  of  sin,  Sin  being  for 
the  greatest  good  of  the  universe,  the  Universality 
of  the  atonement,  Disinterested  Benevolence,  Re- 
generation, and  free-agency,  there  appears  a  per- 
fect coincidence  of  sentiment  between  them. 

In  regard  to  the  public  debate  which  gave  rise  to 
the  sermons,  which  are  examined  in  these  letters, 
perhaps  it  wrould  be  uninteresting  and  useless,  to 
detail  the  particulars  of  it  here.  The  subjects 
handled  in  the  five  first  letters  wrere  the  points  of 
debate  at  that  time.  Thus  much  I  may  be  allowed 
to  say,  that  I  did  not  engage  in  the  controversy,  be- 
cause it  is  my  delight  to  dispute.  I  was  led  to  it 
from  a  sense  of  duty — and  from  the  same  motive  I 
have  written. 

Respecting  the  subjects  of  this  investigation,  I 
coasider  them  some  of  the  most  important  doctrines 
of  the  Gospel ;  and  therefore  it  is  not  a  matter  of 
indifference  which  system  is  embraced.  Any  sys- 
tem which  eclipses  the  glory  of  the  Divine  attri- 
butes, and  exculpates  man  from  blame  in  his  pick- 
ed conduct,  must  be  unfriendly  to  the  interests  of 
religion.  If  man  be  not/ree,  he  is  not  responsible, 
not  a  subject  of  moral  government,  neither  reward- 
able  nor  punishable,  upon  the  principles  of  justice 
.md  goodness.  Indeed  all  laws,  human  and  divine, 
presuppose  an  ability  in  man  to  obey  them.     Why 


PREFACE.  vii 

does  the  judge  pronounce  sentence  of  condemnation 
upon  a  criminal  ?  Is  it  not  on  the  supposition  that 
he  might  have  done  otherwise  ?  Whatever  myste- 
ries therefore,  there  may  be  in  the  science  of  human 
nature,  and  however  difficult  it  may  be  to  obviate 
the  objections  which  may  be  urged  from  prescience, 
there  is  no  fact  more  certain  than  this,  that  man  is 
a  free-agent,  as  it  respects  his  moral  conduct. — 
Those  gentlemen  who  urge  the  doctrine  of  total 
depravity  against  this  truth,  seem  to  forget  one  very 
important  trait  in  the  Gospel  system,  viz.  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ,  and  the  benefits  which  universally 
flow  from  it  to  mankind,  by  which  they  are  gra- 
ciously restored  to  the  power  of  action. 

To  be  an  idle,  indifferent  spectator,  therefore, 
while  doctrines  are  propagated  with  avidity,  which 
destroy  this  characteristic  of  man,  and  nullify  so 
important  a  trait  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ, 
cannot  be  justly  considered  a  Christian  virtue.  It 
is  not,  it  is  true,  congenial  to  the  feelings  of  my 
mind,  to  enter  the  list  of  controversy,  while  con- 
scious many  things  must  be  said  offensive  to  some 
who  are  justly  esteemed  on  many  accounts.  The 
all-important  truths  of  God,  however,  are  of  vastly 
more  importance  than  the  feelings  of  any  num- 
ber of  individuals,  and  they  must  be  defended, 
although  the  others  should  be  offended.  However 
the  piety  and  friendship  of  those  persons  who  em- 
brace the  doctrines  herein  opposed,  may  be  valued, 
the  sacred  truths  of  the  Gospel  are  not  to  be  tamely 


viii  PREFACE. 

sacrificed  for  the  sake  of  purchasing  their  friend- 
ship.    No  candid  Christian  can  require  this. 

I  may  have  mistaken  the  meaning  of  scripture, 
but  I  cannot  mistake  the  sincerity  of  my  intentions, 
and  the  purity  of  my  motives.  And  whatever 
aversion  I  might  have  to  controversies  of  this  des- 
cription, I  believe  myself  called  in  the  present  in- 
stance, to  take  up  my  cross  and  follow  Christ. — 
Indeed  it  has  been  crossing  to  my  leading  inclina- 
tion to  consent  to  write  and  publish  these  letters. 
In  doing  it,  however,  I  have  satisfied  my  con- 
science, and  hope  to  render  some  small  service  to 
the  cause  of  truth  and  piety — and  I  sincerely  pray, 
that  the  truth  will  not  have  suffered  for  having  pas- 
sed through  my  hands,  and  that,  the  spirit  of  chari- 
ty and  brotherly  love  will  not  be  diminished  by  these 
strictures. 

The  reader  must  judge  for  himself  respecting  the 
sentiments  and  arguments  in  the  following  sheets, 
and  make  up  his  mind  accordingly. 

In  regard  to  those  passages  of  scripture  which 
speak  on  the  subject  of  election,  the  plain  state  of 
the  case  appears  to  be  this, — From  the  circum- 
stance of  God's  choosing  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob, 
and  his  posterity,  to  whom  was  committed  the  live- 
ly oracles  of  truth,  and  through  whom  Jesus  Christ 
was  to  come  according  to  the  flesh,  they  v/ere 
denominated  the  elect,  or  chosen  people  of  God. — 
The  peculiar  care  which  God  manifested  towards 
that  people,  in  the  various  privileges  granted  them. 


PREFACE.  ix 

the  protection  and  deliverance  extended  to  them, 
caused  them  to  conclude  that  all  other  nations  were 
reprobated,  and  that  all  their  nation  were  elected, — 
This  erroneous  sentiment  our  Lord  combated  in  the 
sharp  controversy  he  held  with  their  learned  Doc- 
tors and  Scribes.  When  the  Apostles  were  sent 
out  to  preach  the  glad  tidings  of  salvation  to  Jews 
and  Gentiles,  who,  in  consequence  of  believing  the 
report,  were  collected  into  the  Church,  and  enjoyed 
its  distinguished  privileges,  they  adopted  the  same 
phraseology,  denominating  all  the  members  of  the 
visible  church  the  elect,  the  chosen  people  of  God — 
And  when  speaking  of  the  Gospel  method  of  sal- 
vation, which  was  invariably  the  same  to  Jews  and 
Gentiles,  they  sometimes  called  it  God's  predesti- 
nation, appointment  or  determination.*  This  pre- 
destination, or  predetermination  of  God  respects 
the  means  of  salvation,  the  foundation  of  pardon 
and  acceptance,  which  is  Christ  Jesus,  and  the 
qualification  for  heaven.  These  are  immutably  the 
same,  and  can  never  vary  to  suit  the  whim  and 
caprice  of  mutable  man — man  must  bend  to  them,  or 
otherwise  he  must  suffer  the  fearful  consequence. 

God  is  enthroned  in  uncreated  wisdom  and  good- 
ness, by  which  he  was  led  to  establish  the  most 
wise  and  benevolent  method  to  rescue  man  from  the 
thraldom  of  sin.  Having  fixed  the  terms  on  which 
sinners  must  be  saved,  if  saved,  his  gracious  deter- 
mination is,  never  to  recede  from  them.     Thus  he 

*  See  the  Appendix. 


x  PREFACE. 

hath  appointed  all  obedient  believers  to  everlasting 
life,  and  all  disobedient  unbelievers  to  eternal 
death.  Here  we  may  behold  the  beneficent  pre- 
destination of  God  ;  and  also  see  the  reason  why 
those  terms  are  used  to  designate  the  people  of 
God.  Personal  and  individual  election  and  repro- 
bation appear  to  have  been  strangers  upon  earth  in 
the  Apostles'  days.  By  an  abuse  of  their  phrase- 
ology these  doctrines  have  sprung  up  in  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  by  which  the  minds  of  the  simple  are 
led  astray,  being  continually  tormented  with  doubts 
and  fears,  which  are  engendered  from  erroneous 
conceptions  of  the  divine  character. 

In  the  following  sheets,  I  have  attempted  to  ex- 
plain some  of  those  difficult  passages,  which  have 
been  supposed  to  favour  the  doctrine  of  eternal  and 
individual  election,  and  other  sentiments  intimately 
connected  with  it ;  and  to  answer  some  of  the  argu- 
ments which  have  been  used  to  establish  those 
points.  How  far  I  have  succeeded,  is  not  for  me 
to  determine.  I  must  beg  the  reader's  indul- 
gence for  any  errors  he  may  discover ;  and  also 
intreat  an  interest  in  his  prayers,  that  I  may  expe- 
rience that  deliverance  from  sin,  and  that  perfec- 
tion of  love,  which  qualifies  the  soul  for  eternal 
happiness. 

To  hold  the  truth  in  unrighteousness,  would  only 
expose  us  to  greater  shame  and  contempt.  While. 
therefore,  we   strive  after  accurate  ideas  of  Gods 


PREFACE.  xi 

and  of  his  truth,  let  us  seek  a  conformity  to  his  will 
and  image  in  all  things.  Speculative  knowledge 
alone  only  puffeth  up  the  soul  with  self-conceit ; 
while  charity,  love,  edifieth.  O  that  both  writer 
and  reader  may  so  improve  the  day  of  our  merci- 
fal  visitation,  that  we  may  at  last  inherit  eter- 
nal life. 

N.  B. 


ERRORS  OF  HOPKINS! ANIS\J>. 


LETTER  I. 


ON     FOREORDINATION. 

Rev.  Sir, 

xM  OT  long  since  I  had  an  opportunity  of  reading 
your  sermons  which  were  occasioned  by  the  public 
debate  between  Mr.  Benedict  and  myself,  in  Dur- 
ham, May  2d,  1810-  After  an  attentive  perusal  of 
them,  I  hesitated  whether  I  ought  to  take  any  pub- 
lic notice  of  them  or  not.  This  hesitation,  however, 
did  not  arise  from  any  conviction  of  their  truth, 
nor  from  any  supposed  difficulty  in  refuting  the  er- 
roneous sentiments  you  have  attempted  to  establish; 
but  partly  from  an  aversion  to  controversies  of  this 
nature,  and  partly  from  an  apprehension  that  the 
manifest  contradictions,  the*  glaring  absurdities,  and 
the  many  misapplications  of  scripture,  were  suffi- 
cient to  carry  their  own  confutation.  But  when  it 
is  considered  that  the  subtil ty  of  error  insinuates 
itself  often  imperceptibly  into  the  human  mind, 
by  which  the  judgment  is  perverted,  and  a  wrong 
bias  given  to  the  whole  train  of  thinking,  unless 
tfmely  checked  in  its  progress  by  the  barrier  of 


H  LETTER  I. 

truth — and  also  that  I  am  more  immediately  con- 
cerned than  any  one  else,  in  consequence  of  having 
taken  an  active  part  in  the  debate  alluded  to,  I 
think  myself  bound  to  enter  a  public  protest  against 
what  are  deemed  the  dangerous  errors  advanced  in 
your  sermons. 

Another  consideration  likewise  induces  me  to 
take  my  pen  on  this  occasion,  namely,  that  you 
have  not  given  a  fair  and  candid  statement  of  the 
points  debated,  nor  of  the  arguments  used.  This 
I  hope  to  convince  you  of  in  the  course  of  these 
letters.  Let  these  considerations,  dear  sir,  be  my 
apology  for  troubling  you  with  these  remarks  ;  and 
also  for  continuing  a  controversy  which  is  already 
worn  thread  bare,  by  the  repeated  publications  on 
rhese  subjects.  The  propositions  you  have  stated, 
and  the  arguments  used  to  support  them,  have,  the 
most  of  them,  been  answered  over  and  over  again, 
by  men  of  the  first  qualifications,  both  as  it  respects 
erudition  and  piety ;  and  their  arguments  remain 
unanswered  and  unanswerable  to  the  present  day. 
It  is  hardly  possible  therefore  to  advance  any  thing 
new  upon  subjects  which  have  been  so  ably  investi- 
gated.*    It  is  possible,  However,  for  these  remarks 

*  Considering",  hovrever,  that  Hopkinsianism  is  of  compari- 
lively  recent  date,  and  that  in  several  instances* it  differs  from 
Calvinism,  on  these  accounts  the  controversy,  as  far  as  we  are 
concerned  in  it,  assumes  in  some  respects,  a  different  aspect. 
Formerly  we  had  to  contend  for  the  moral  agency  of  man,  the 
universality  of  the  atonement,  and  justification  by  faith. — 
TruUi  has  at  length  prevailed,  and  those  point*  are  yielded  by 
many,  although  so  explained  as  to  do  away  their  practical  in- 
fluence. 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  15 

to  fall  into  the  hands  of  some,  who  have  not  seen 
the  invaluable  authors  alluded  to  ;  and  under  God, 
may  be  a  mean,  cither  of  reclaiming  them  from  a 
pernicious  error,  or  of  confirming  them  in  the  truth. 
Without  further  introduction,  I  begin  with  som-3 
remarks  upon  the  text  which  you  have  made  the 
foundation  of  your  sermon  on  foreordination.  That 
God  worketh  all  things  after  the  counsel  of  his  own 
will,  is  not  disputed  ;  but  that  the  doctrine  you 
have  attempted  to  deduce  from  these  words,  was 
never  designed  by  the  Apostle,  is  easily  demonstrat- 
ed. You  say,  "  The  first  is,  that  God  brings  to 
pass  every  thing  which  is  brought  to  pass  ;"  where- 
as the  text  says  nothing  about  "  bringing  every 
ihing  to  pass  which  is  brought  to  pass."  It  sim- 
ply states,  that  he  worketh  all  things  after  the  coun- 
sel of  his  own  will.  The  question  to  be  determined 
is.  What  is  the  counsel  of  his  will?  You  say  that  it 
means,  that  "  God  foreordained  every  event  which 
comes  to  pass,"  p.  1.  If  every  event  which  comes 
to  pass,  is  brought  to  pass  by  God's  plan,  as  you 
call  it,  or  is  an  effect  of  his  decree,  then  there  can 
be  no  event,  however  trivial  in  itself,  however  wick- 
ed, foolish,  and  inconsistent,  but  what  is  included 
in  this  plan  which  you  ascribe  to  God,  and  which, 
according  to  your  statement,  is  the  effect  of  his  un- 
controlable  decree.  If  this  system  does  not  ascribe 
wickedness,  foolishness,  and  absurdity  to  God,  there 
are  no  such  things  as  wickedness,  foolishness,  and 
absurdity  in  the  world  ;  for  all  events,  whether  they 
Jb'e  wicked  or  good,  foolish  or  wise,  absurd  or  con- 


3.6  LETTEK  I. 

sistent,  you  intimate  are  included  in  God's  plan,  p. 
£.  Are  not  foolishness,  wickedness,  and  all  incon- 
sistencies, events  ?  If  not,  what  are  they  ?  causes, 
means,  or  ends  ?  It  matters  not  by  what  name  they 
are  distinguished,  whether  causes,  means,  ends  or 
events  ;  for  according  to  your  system,  they  are  all 
included  in  the  divine  plan;  and  you  assert,  p.  1, 
"  God  brings  to  pass  every  thing  which  is  brought 
to  pass  ;"  and  therefore  whatever  name  is  attached 
to  what  comes  to  pass,  whether  cause  or  effect,  wis- 
dom or  folly,  they  are  all,  according  to  your  senti- 
ment, the  work  of  God.  Now,  sir,  you  must  either 
deny  that  there  are  such  things  as  folly,  wicked- 
ness, and  absurdity,  or  ascribe  them  to  God.  If 
you  undertake  to  do  the  first,  you  must  blot  out  of 
the  Bible  all  those  passages  of  scripture  which 
speak  of  those  things,  (and  you  know  they  are  very 
many)  and  shew  the  inspired  writers  were  mista- 
ken. If  you  ascribe  them  to  God  still,  as  you  have 
already  done  in  your  book,  I  ask  who  imputes  "fol- 
ly" to  him  now  ?  p.  3.  It  will  not  help  you  any  to 
say,  that  these  wicked  and  foolish  actions,  are  said 
to  be  the  actions  of  men.  This  we  know;  and  in 
•his  respect  we  follow  the  inspired  writers,  in  im- 
puting them  to  wicked  and  foolish  men.  But  ac- 
cording to  your  doctrine,  they  are  no  more  the  ac- 
rions  of  men,  than  the  moving  of  my  pen  are  its 
actions  ;  and  in  this  case  it  would  be  as  absurd  to 
nnd  fault  with  my  pen  for  bad  writing,  as  to  find 
fault  with  men  for  their  inconsistent  conduct.  For 
you  say,    All  events  are  brought  about  by  God's 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  17 

plan,  and  expressly  assert  in  the  first  page  of  your 
book,  that  they  are  his  work. 

Permit  me  here  to  repeat  the  text  and  your  com- 
ment. Who  worketh  all  things  after  the  counsel  oj' 
his  own  will.  "  There  are  two  ideas,"  say  you, 
"  contained  in  this  passage."  The  first  is,  That 
God  brings  to  pass  every  thing  which  is  brought  to 
pass.  The  other  is,  That  he  brings  all  things  to 
pass,  according  to  a  plan,  or  scheme  devised  by  his 
own  mind."  Do  folly  and  sin  come  to  pass?  most 
certainly.  Who  brings  them  to  pass  ?  u  God  brings 
to  pass,  every  thing  which  comes  to  pass."  Is  sin 
and  folly  produced  by  wisdom  and  holiness  ?  You 
say  yes,  by  admitting  God  to  be  wise  and  holy.  Do 
these  effects  answer  to  their  cause?  No  ;  for  noth- 
ing is  more  opposite  than  wisdom  and  holiness  to 
folly  and  sin;  and  yet  according  to  your  sentiments, 
sin  and  folly  have  resulted  from  infinite  wisdom  and 
holiness.  I  ask  again,  who  imputes  ''consummate 
folly"  to  God  now  ? 

Any  hypothesis  which  imputes  wickedness  and 
folly  to  a  being  of  infinite  wisdom  and  holiness, 
must  be  false  5  but  your  doctrine  of  foreordination 
does  this ;  and  therefore  it  is  false.  If  any  should 
doubt  respecting  your  ascribing  sin  to  God,  let  them 
examine  the  note,  p.  23.  Here  you  state  express- 
ly, that  God  is  the  efficient  cause  of  sin ;  and  lest 
your  readers  should  not  believe  you  meant  to  make 
God  the  cause  of  sin,  you  have  made  the  words  effi- 
cient cause,  emphaticalp  by  causing  them  to  be  print- 
ed in  italics. 

B  2 


18  LETTER  I. 

Having  made  these  general  remarks  upon  your 
explanation  of  the  text,  I  proceed  to  consider 
the  subject  more  methodically.  In  doing  this,  per- 
mit me,  in  some  measure,  to  imitate  the  method  you 
have  adopted.  From  the  perfection  of  God's  char- 
acter it  is  impossible  for  him  to  foreordain  whatso- 
ever comes  to  pass.  However  difficult  in  many 
instances,  it  may  be  to  prove  a  negative,  I  think  it 
not  impossible  in  the  present  case.  It  will  be  ad- 
mitted by  all,  that  God  is  infinitely  just,  wise,  holy, 
good,  and  true — and  any  system  which,  either  in  its 
principle,  or  by  consequence,  militates  against  these 
perfections  of  Deity,  must  be  erroneous.  That  the 
system  which  you  have  advanced,  and  advocated 
does  this,  the  following  observations  are  designed 
io  shew. 

I.  1.  It  militates  against  the  justice  of  God,  accord- 
ing to  your  own  assertion  in  page  67,  where  you 
say,  "  Impartiality  requires  that  all  innocent  per- 
sons should  be  justified."  Impartial  conduct  is  an 
exemplification  of  justice.  Now  if  God  from  all 
eternity  foreordained  whatsoever  comes  to  pass,  he 
ordained  the  condemnation  of  part  of  the  angels,  of 
Adam  and  all  his  posterity  while  in  a  state  of  perfect 
innocence.  It  is  of  no  use  to  say  they  became  sin- 
ners before  the  sentence  of  condemnation  went  forth 
against  them  ;  for  agreeably  to  your  system  their  sin 
was  only  an  intermediate  link  in  the  immense  chain 
of  irresistable  decrees,  which  was  necessary  to 
£>ring  about  the  end  which  God  had  in  view.  If 
therefore  justice  or  impartiality  required  all  irmo- 


ON  FOREORDINATION  19 

cent  persons  should  be  justified,  it  is  an  impeach- 
ment of  that  resplendent  attribute  of  Deity,  to  say 
that  he  foreordained  their  condemnation  while  in  a 
state  of  perfect  innocence.  And  in  regard  to  their 
sin,  agreeably  to  your  doctrine,  they  acted  perfectly 
according  to  the  divine  mind,  unless  you  suppose 
his  decrees  were  contrary  to  his  will;  and  if  so, they 
could  not  have  done  otherwise,  unless  you  suppose 
.they  could  have  resisted  the  irresistable  decress  of 
God,  which  is  a  contradiction. 

See  that  stern  judge  upon  the  bench,  and  that 
trembling  criminal  at  the  bar — The  witnessess  are 
pointed  in  their  testimony  against  him — murder, 
wilful  murder  is  proved — His  counsel,  or  rather  a 
professed  advocate  for  the  judge,  proceeds  to  devel* 
ope  the  circumstances  of  the  case — •"  The  criminal 
says  he,  is  guilty  of  wilful  murder,  and  therefore  the 
sentence  of  condemnation  must  be  pronounced 
against  him.  True,  he  is  dependent  on  the  honour- 
able court  for  his  present  existence  ;  for  such  unlim- 
ited authority  hath  his  honour  over  the  lives  of  men, 
especially  such  as  are  devoted  to  such  flagrant  acts 
ef  wickedness,  that  he  may  take  them  away  at  plea- 
sure— But  be  it  known  to  you,  gentlemen  of  the  jury, 
that  this  same  honourable  judge  contrived  c  a  plan' 
by  which  this  wicked  murderer  should  be  excited 
to  sin  as  he  has ;  and  lest  his  '  plan  or  scheme' 
should  not  take  effect  he  secretly  provoked  him  to 
anger  against  his  brother,  and  even  guided  his  hand 
when  the  fatal  blow  was  given."  But  pray  Mr. 
counsel,  says  the  forefnan  of  the  jury,  do  you  mean 


20  LETTER  I. 

to  impeach  the  character  of  our  honourable  judge  ? 
I  have  always  thought  differently  of  him — I  took 
him  for  an  upright  man — "  and  so  indeed  he  is," 
rejoins  the  wise  counsel — "  Permit  me  to  explain  the 
reasons  of  his  conduct.  You  must  know  then,  that 
there  are  some  men  "  ministers  of  satan,"  who  pre- 
tend to  plead  the  cause  of  righteousness,  who  are 
continually  harping  upon  the  evil  of  sin,  its  unhappy 
influence  upon  society;  and  they  also  insinuate,  that 
my  manner  of  vindicating  the  judge  has  a  tendency 
to  asperse  his  character,  especially  his  goodness 
and  justice — I  hope  you  have  not  heard  their  ha- 
rangues— But  as  I  was  about  to  say,  our  honoura- 
ble judge  is  of  a  quite  different  opinion  respecting 
sin — He  thinks  the  rest  of  our  honest  neighbours 
could  not  be  happy  were  there  not  some  murderers 
and  thieves,  &c.  that  he  might  have  an  opportunity 
of  displaying  his  sovereignty  in  punishing  them. — 
To  convince  you  and  all  other  good  people  that  he 
is  right,  he  contrived,  as  I  said  before,  that  this 
man,  who  stands  trembling  before  you,  should  com- 
mit this  sin,  that  he  might  make  a  public  example  of 
him  before  you  all.  Some,  indeed,  have  intimated 
that  he  is  not  just  in  punishing  men  for  doing  what 
he  designed  they  should ;  but  this  only  proceeds 
from  ignorance  ;  and  he  wishes  to  let  them  know 
how  mistaken  they  are.  It  is  true  "  his  holy  na- 
ture abhors"  murder,  although  he  has  determined 
many  shall  commit  it,  even  against  his  commands — 
For  you  must  also  know  that  he  has  expressly  for- 
bidden it — but  his  determination,  which  must  stand, 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  21 

because  perfectly  according  to  his  good  pleasure,  is 
#  secretly  opposed  to  his  commands,  and  it  must  and 
shall  be  accomplished.  Therefore,  gentlemen,  please 
to  pronounce  sentence,  that  our  judge  may  have  an 
opportunity  of  convincing  you  of  the  justice  and  im- 
partiality of  his  determinations. " 

Do  you  think,  sir,  the  judge  would  approbate 
such  a  speech  ?  and  yet  in  such  a  point  of  light  you 
represent  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth,  for  you  ex- 
pressly assert  that  all  things,  and  consequently  wick- 
edness of  every  kind,  is  brought  about  by  the  agen- 
cy of  God,  and  that  they  are  according  to  the  coun- 
sel of  his  will,  and  yet  that  he  will  adjudge  to  ever- 
lasting torments  those  who  thus  fulfil  his  will.  If 
such  sentiments  do  not  cast  an  impenetrable  mist 
around  the  glory  of  God's  justice,  I  know  not  what 
can. 

2.  But  this  doctrine  not  only  eclipses  the  glory 
of  God's  justice  in  the  condemnation  of  the  wicked, 
it  also  militates,  in  the  second  place,  against  the 
wisdom  of  God.  For  according  to  the  representa- 
tion you  have  given  of  his  character,  he  is  so  defi- 
cient in  wisdom  that  he  cannot  govern  the  world 
without  a  previous  plan.  Here  you  reduce  the  in- 
finitely wise  God  to  the  level  of  an  ignorant  mechan- 
ic, who  cannot  see  the  end  from  the  beginning  with- 
out a  prescribed  plan.  I  conclude  his  own  infinite 
mind  is  sufficient  to  guide  him  in  all  his  multifarious 
works  and  ways,  without  any  previously  devised 
*  plan  or  scheme."  The  goodness,  wisdom,  and 
immutability  of  his  counsel,  as  well  as  his  infinite 


22  LETTER  I. 

foresight  of  all  possible  causes  and  events,  preclude 
the  necessity  of  any  other  limits  to    regulate  his* 
adorable  conduct. 

Your  doctrine  also  militates  against  the  wisdom 
of  God  by  making  the  decrees,  and  commands 
clash — you  very  justly  conclude  that  the  harmony 
of  God's  works  are  marks  or  evidences  of  his  wis- 
dom. But  in  p.  7.  you  insinuate  that  his  decrees 
and  commands  are  in  opposition  to  each  other.  lie 
decreed  that  man  should  murder,  and  that  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  should  make  their  children  pass  through 
the  fire  to  Moloch,  which  thing  he  commanded  them 
not.  Here  then  are  two  works  of  the  Almighty,  his 
decrees  and  commands  directly  opposed  to  each  oth- 
er. Is  this  harmony  ?  Such  conduct  is  so  far  from 
being  a  mark  of  wisdom,  that  it  is  indicative  of  the 
most  consummate  duplicity  and  folly.  It  is  an  evi- 
dence of  duplicity,  because  it  supposes  him  to 
command  mankind  to  do  that,  which  he  never  de- 
signed they  should — and  it  is  an  indication  of  folly 
to  publish  laws,  which  were  superceded  by  a  prior 
act  of  the  Almighty,  called  a  decree.  As  God  is  in- 
finitely sincere,  and  wise,  he  cannot  be  the  author  of 
that  doctrine  which  necessarily  imputes  insincerity 
and  folly  to  him ;  and  as  the  jarring  sentiments  which 
you  advocate  fix  these  reproachful  blots  on  his 
character,  they  must,  on  that  very  account,  if  no 
other  reasons  could  be  assigned,  be  erroneous. 

Another  reason  why  your  inconsistent  doctrine 
sullies  the  glory  pf  infinite  wisdom  is,  that  it  supr- 
poses  it  impossible  for  God  to  foresee  what  mil  £*, 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  23 

unless  he  predetermine  it  shall  be.  The  doc- 
trine espoused  by  us,  acknowledges,  not  only 
that  his  infinite  prescience  seeth  what  will  be, 
but  also  all  that  may,  and  might  have  been.  And 
this  prescience  does  not  depend  upon  a  predetermi- 
nation of  the  Almighty  for  its  existence,  nor  upon 
the. transpiring  events  brought  about  by  the  volunta- 
ry conduct  of  free  agents,  but  is  an  essential  per- 
fection of  his  nature.  To  say  that  his  prescience 
depends  upon  his  predetermination,  is  to  suppose  a 
time  when  the  Almighty  did  not  possess  infinite 
knowledge.  In  this  way  you  make  knowledge,  or 
wisdom  respecting  future  events,  an  adventitious 
property  of  the  divine  mind,  and  therefore  not  es- 
sential :  and  if  not  essential  he  may  exist  without 
it — It  is  easy  to  perceive,  therefore,  that  your  doc- 
trine in  this  way  also,  eclipses  the  glory  of  infinite 
wisdom.  It  were  easy,  without  any  such  perfection 
as  infinite  knowledge,  to  predict  future  events,  if 
these  events  depended  solely  on  a  predetermination 
in  the  Almighty  to  bring  them  to  pass  :  but  God  pos- 
sesses this  perfection  in  the  most  pre-eminent  de- 
gree ;  for  known  unto  him  are  all  his  works  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world :  and  inasmuch  as  your  doc- 
trine of  foreordination  annihilates  his  prescience,  it 
must  be  unscriptural  and  irrational. 

Once  more — the  doctrine  of  immutable  decrees 
respecting  every  event  sullies  the  glory  of  God-s 
wisdom,  by  supposing  him  incapable  of  governing 
mankind  as  free  agents.  If  all  our  actions  are  the 
result  of  a  predetermining  cause  in  God,  as  you  as- 


24  LETTER  I. 

sert,  we  have  no  more  freedom  than  the  water  which 
descends  from  the  clouds.  To  adopt  your  senti- 
ment therefore,  and  then  talk  about  freedom  and 
responsibility  in  man,  is  perfect  nonsense.  On  this 
absurd  principle  his  freedom  is  purely  mechanical, 
for  he  can  no  more  move  in  opposition  to  irresisti- 
ble decrees,  than  he  can  reverse  the  eternal  laws  of 
order,  unless  you  suppose  him  capable  of  breaking 
God's  decrees ;  and  in  this  case  certainly  the 
"  eternal  purpose,"  would  not  take  effect.  So  that 
according  to  your  principle  all  his  thoughts,  words, 
and  actions  are  as  immutably  fixed,  as  the  throne  of 
God  itself.  How  then  in  the  name  of  reason,  can 
you  assert,  that  man  is  a  free  agent,  and  accounta- 
ble for  his  conduct  ?  Do  you  think  merely  because 
he  feels  no  compulsion,  he  is  therefore  free  ?  The 
water,  the  air,  nor  the  fire  feel  any  compulsive  force, 
although  governed  by  immutable  laws — are  they 
therefore  free-agents,  and  responsible  for  their  con- 
duct ?  O  sir,  can  you  lay  your  hand  upon  your 
breast,  and  in  the  fear  of  God  say,  that  the  ideas 
you  have  advanced  respecting  man's  responsibility, 
and  the  reasons  for  it,  carry  conviction  to  your  own 
judgment  ?  Pardon  this  appeal,  sir, — it  is  hard  to 
suspect  a  man's  sincerity.  But  I  sincerely  con- 
fess, I  can  see  not  the  smallest  shade  of  difference, 
upon  your  scheme,  between  the  reasons  which  are 
offered  for  man's  accountability,  and  what  might  be 
given  for  inert  matter. 

Neither  will  it  be  of  any  avail  to  say  that  his  ac- 
tions result  from  his  depraved  nature.    He  is  no 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  & 

more  accountable  for  this,  on  your  principle,  than 
the  water  is  for  its  solidity,  or  the  air  for  its  transpa- 
rency. For  even  this  fallen,  depraved  nature,  ac- 
cording  to  your  scheme,  was  brought  upon  mankind 
by  Adam,  and  upon  him,  by  an  almighty  decree, 
made  antecedent  to  his  existence,  which  he  could  no 
more  resist,  or  control,  than  he  could  dethrone  the 
Almighty  himself.  And  to  make  mankind  account- 
able for  that  in  which  they  had  no  concern,  is  as  un- 
reasonable, as  to  make  your  child  of  two  years  old 
accountable  for  the  errors  of  your  sermons.  In  fact, 
from  the  fairest  principles  of  reason,  inferable  from 
your  first  principle  advanced  in  the  first  page  of 
your  book,  God  is  the  immediate  author  not  only  of 
all  the  good,  but  also  of  all  the  evil  ever  committed 
by  men  or  devils.  And  if  this  is  not  scandalizing 
the  immaculate  character  of  God  in  the  most  cm- 
phatical  sense  of  the  word,  I  know  not  what  ought, 
in  justice,  to  be  so  called. 

Now  if  the  Almighty  cannot  govern  man  as  a  free 
agent,  it  is  because  he  lacks  wisdom.  But  accord- 
ing to  your  scheme  he  either  cannot  or  will  not.  For 
the  doctrine  of  foreordination,  and  universal  and  ir- 
resistible decrees,  is  totally  subversive  of  free 
agency.  It  is  certainly  a  greater  manifestation  of 
wisdom  to  adapt  a  government  to  the  circumstances 
and  capacities  of  a  world  of  free,  responsible  agents, 
than  it  is  to  compel  them  in  all  their  actions,  by  an 
irresistible  influence.  Seeing  therefore  that  God  is 
infinitely  wise,  and  that  the  doctrine  advanced  by 
yt)u?  sir,  is  subversive  of  that  adorable  perfection,  it 
c 


26  LETTER  I. 

must  of  consequence  be  false  ;  and  a  false  doctrine 
cannot  originate  from  God. 

3.  In  the  third  place,  your  doctrine  militates 
against  the  holiness  of  God.  If  the  Almighty  be 
holy,  as  you  must  admit,  nothing  unholy  can  pro- 
ceed from  him.  But  there  are  many  unholy  events 
which  take  place.  Do  these  unholy,  sinful  events 
originate  from  God  ?  I  suppose  you  will  answer,  No. 
But  what  says  your  doctrine  ?  "  God  includes  in 
his  plan  every  thing  which  comes  to  pass."  Does 
not  sin  come  to  pass  ?  and  who  brings  it  to  pass  ? 
u  The  first  is,  That  God  brings  to  pass  every  thing 
which  is  brought  to  pass."  God  brings  every 
thing  to  pass — sin  comes  to  pass  5  therefore  God 
brings  sin  to  pass. 

How  will  you  avoid  this  conclusion  ?  You  cannot 
in  any  way  fairly,  but  by  denying  your  principle. — 
An  unholy  effect  must  have  an  unholy  cause  ;  but 
sin,  the  effect,  is  unholy,  and  therefore  must  proceed 
from  an  unholy  cause.  Now  according  to  your  doc- 
trine sin  originates  from  God,  as  its  "  efficient 
cause  ;V  and  from  this  it  follows  by  fair  conse- 
quence that  God  is  unholy.  Such  are  the  fatal  con- 
sequences of  your  doctrine — it  strikes  at  the  holi- 
ness of  God.  But  God  is  infinitely  holy,  and  there- 
fore that  "  scheme"  which  annihilates  this  essential 
property  of  the  divine  nature,  cannot  be  true. 

4.  The  goodness  of  God  shines  among  his  adora- 
ble perfections  like  the  moon  amidst  the  stars  of 
heaven  ;  and  whatever  has  a  tendency  to  tarnish  its 
glories  xnusjt  be  rejected.     But  your  doctrine  of 


ON  FOREORDINATION. 

Universal  decrees,  casts  an  impenetrable  shade 
around  it,  until  it  is  dispelled  by  the  wafting  rays  of 
truth.  •  While  speaking  of  the  precious  elect,  it  is 
true,  you  unfold  some  of  the  glories  of  this  pre-emi- 
nent perfection.  You  have,  however,  shrouded  it 
in  a  mantle  of  darkness,  by  asserting  that  God  be- 
fore all  worlds  decreed,  that  one  part  of  mankind 
should  never  be  object-  of  his  goodness,  but  were 
eternally  doomed  to  never-ending  torments  to  ben- 
fit  the  elect.  What  becomes  of  the  goodness  of  God, 
while  he  is  represented  as  dooming  myriads  of  in- 
telligent beings,  not  excepting  the  innocent  child  of 
a  day  old,  to  eternal  torments,  merely  because  he 
would?  Do  you  eay,  not  so  j  "they  are  sent  to 
hell,  because  they  were  sinners/'  But  according 
to  your  doctrine,  they  were  as  much  doing  the  will  of 
heaven  while  committing  sin,  as  the  saints  are  while 
surrounding  the  throne  of  God — For,  you  say  God 
hath  decreed  all  the  sins  in  the  universe,  and  that 
his  decrees  are  perfectly  according  to  his  pleasure* 
And  is  it  an  act  of  goodness  to  punish  his  creatures 
everlastingly,  for  doing  his  will  ?  Has  not  Jesus 
Christ  said,  that  whosoever  doeth  the  will  of  his 
heavenly  Father,  shall  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  ?  And  do  you  not  roundly  assert  that  all 
things  are  according  to  his  will  and  pleasure  ?  And 
considering  the  saying  of  Jesus  Christ  just  alluded 
to,  how  will  you  prove  that  the  reprobate  is  damned 
any  more  than  the  elect,  agreeably  to  your 
"  scheme."  This  therefore  is  another  reason  why 
your  doctrine  is   false,  because  it  annihilates  the 


28  LETTER  I. 

goodness  of  God,  and  leads  you  to  contradict  Jesu* 
Christ,  the  true  witness, 

5.  Truth  is  always  consistent  with  itself.  If 
therefore  we  embrace  a  system  of  truth,  it  will  not 
contradict  itself — and  as  God  is  a  being  of  immuta- 
ble truth,  he  can  neither  lie,  nor  contradict  himself. 
T3ut  the  system  you  endeavour  to  defend  cannot  be 
true,  because  it  is  self-contradictory.  In  the  first 
place  you  say,  every  event  is  brought  about  by  the 
Almighty ;  and  in  p.  11,  you  quote  2  Sam.  xvii.  14, 
For  the  Lord  had  appointed  to  defeat  the  good  counsel 
ofAhithophel,  and  then  add,  "  AhithophePs  counsel 
Was  frustrated,  because  it  was  contrary  to  the  coun- 
sel of  him  who  says,  My  counsel  shall  stand,  I  will 
do  all  my  pleasure."  Was  not  the  counsel  of  Ahith- 
ophel  an  event  ?  and  you  say  all  events  are 
brought  about  by  the  Lord  ;  and  yet  here  you  say, 
it  was  contrary  to  the  Lord's  counsel.  Do  you  mean 
to  maintain  that  the  Lord's  counsels  are  in  opposi- 
tion one  to  the  other,  as  you  intimate  his  decrees 
and  commands  are  ?  In  p.  4,  you  say,  "  That  eve- 
ry event  which  occurs  is  a  part  of  his  perfect 
plan."  Yet  in  the  case  of  Ahithophel,  which  cer- 
rainly  was  one  of  "  every  event,"  you  assert  that  it 
was  contrary  to  this  u  perfect  plan,"  and  of  course 
not  included  in  it.  In  p.  22,  you  say,  "  Nothing 
could  be  more  abhorrent  to  his  nature"  than  for 
the  Jews  to  cause  their  children  to  pass  through  the 
fire  to  Moloch ;  although  according  to  your  former 
statement,  it  was  "  included  in  the  perfect  plan" 
"  brought  to  pass  by  God,"  and  according  to  "  his 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  29 

pleasure.'^  Are  then  those  events  which  God  brings 
about  himself,  which  are  consequently  according  to 
his  good  pleasure,  and  included  in  his  plan,  so  odi- 
ous to  him,  that,  "  nothing  can  be  more  abhorrent 
to  his  nature  ?"  How  will  you  reconcile  these  flat 
and  palpable  contradictions  ?  P.  26,  "  If  the  de- 
crees of  God"  respect  all  events,  and  are  eternal 
and  immutable,  then  all  his  enemies  may  despair  of 
accomplishing  their  purposes."  "  If  the  decrees  of 
God  respect  all  events,"  and  all  are  according 
"  to  his  eternal  purpose,"  pray  tell  mc  what  event 
is  not  included  among  all  events,  and  what  purpose 
can  be  opposed  to  his  purposes.  Are  not  all  the 
events  and  purposes  of  all  the  enemies  of  God,  in- 
cluded among  all  events  and  every  purpose,  which 
you  say  are  brought  about  by  God  himself !  How 
then  can  you  consistently  talk  about  events  and 
purposes,  in  contradistinction  from  the  events  and 
purposes  of  God,  seeing  "  He  brings  every  tiling  to 
pass  which  is  brought  to  pass."  This  is  another 
instance  of  your  contradictory  assertions  ;  and  it  is 
as  much  impossible  for  a  man  to  believe  both  sides 
of  a  contradiction  true,  as  it  is  to  reconcile  Hopkin- 
sianismwith  the  oracles  of  God.  Credulous  minds 
may  be  fascinated  for  a  season,  by  the  sorceries  of 
error  ;  but  they  can  never  be  brought  understand- 
ingly  to  embrace  a  "  scheme"  manifestly  contra- 
dictory in  itself.  It  must  therefore  be  from  inatten- 
tion, indifference,  or  want  of  spiritual  light,  that 
men  profess  faith  in  such  glaring  absurdities  as  you 
have  advanced.     If  a  man  had  set  himself  to  work 

c  2 


30  LETTER  I. 

on  purpose  to  blacken  the  character  of  God  by  the 
most  vile  misrepresentations,  he  could  not  have 
done  it  more  effectually  than  you  have  done,  I  hope 
undesignedly,  in  your  sermons,  especially  the  first 
and  third.  For  no  man  could  impute  more  than  all 
the  wickedness,  that  ever  has  been,  is,  and  will  be, 
to  him  ;  and  this  you  have  done  by  saying  that  "  He 
brings  to  pass  every  thing  which  is  brought  to 
pass ;"  unless  by  some  extraordinary  effort,  you  are 
able  to  prove  that  sin  is  no-thing,  that  is,  nothing. 
Seeing  therefore  that  such  is  the  natural  tendency  of 
your  doctrine,  it  must  be  false,  because  God  is  just, 
wise,  holy  and  true. 

6.  It  might  be  added  in  the  sixth  place,  that  your 
doctrine  destroys  the  immutability  of  God.  From 
ihe  immutability  of  his  counsel,  we  may  suppose 
that  he  never  alters  any  of  his  designs.  In  the  ac- 
count Moses  has  given  of  the  creation  of  the  world, 
it  is  said  at  the  conclusion  of  the  whole,  And  God 
saw  every  thing  that  he  had  made,  and,  behold,  it  was 
very  good.  Man,  at.  this  time  was  holy — He  after- 
wards became  unholy — and  if  this  change  was  an 
effect  purely  of  an  act  of  God,  which  it  must  have 
teen,  if  all  things  are  brought  to  pass  by  him,  then 
God  changed  his  design — he  first  designed  man 
should  be  holy,  and  afterwards  that  he  should  be  wn- 
holy  ;  unless  you  can  make  it  appear  that  holiness 
and  unholiness  are  one  and  the  same,  or  that  God 
designed  he  should  be  holy  and  unholy  at  the  same 
:imc.  which  is  a  contradiction.     Moreover,  it  seems 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  31 

evident,  that,  had  not  sin  entered  into  the  world, 
man  would  not  have  been  subject  to  death — such 
was  his  nature,  viewed  in  connexion  with  surround- 
ing circumstances.  The  design  then  of  the  Almigh- 
ty appears  to  have  been  that  man  should  be  immor- 
tal in  his  pristine  state.  To  suppose  therefore  that 
sin  was  brought  about  by  God,  by  which  Adam's 
nature  was  so  far  changed  that  he  became  mortal,  is 
to  suppose  that  God's  design  toward  Adam  wa>: 
changed — unless  you  suppose  he  designed  him  im- 
mortal and  mortal  at  the  same  time,  which  is  a  con- 
tradiction, and  therefore  impossible.  But  by  ad- 
mitting the  designs  of  God  were  immutably  the 
same  towards  man,  and  that  he  designed  him  to  be 
good,  holy,  and  immortal ;  and  that  man  voluntarily 
and  unnecessarily  sinned  against  the  law  of  his  na- 
ture, or  the  law  of  God,  and  thereby  made  himself 
bad,  unholy,  and  mortal,  we  secure  the  immutabili- 
ty of  God,  and  place  mutability  toman's  account, 
where  it  properly  belongs.  The  contrary  senti- 
ment transfers  it  from  man  to  God,  and  thereby  im- 
peaches him  with  a  defect  foreign  to  his  nature ; 
and  therefore  that  sentiment  is  not  founded  in  truth. 

II.  1.  I  proceed  in  the  second  place  to  notice  the 
texts  of  scripture  by  which  you  attempt  to  support 
your  inconsistent  notion  of  predestination  ;  and  as 
you  lay  the  greatest  stress  upon  those  respecting 
the  crucifixion  of  Christ,  they  will  be  noticed  first. 
Lukexxii.  22.  And  truly  the  Son  of  man  goeth  as 
it  was  d-etermined  ;  but  xooc  unto  that  may,  by  whom 


32  LETTER  I. 

he  is  betrayed.*  "  This  scripture,"  say  you,  "  can 
mean  nothing  less  than  this,  That  God  had  deter- 
mined that  his  Son  should  be  betrayed  by  Judas." 
p.  13.  By  what  rule  of  criticism  will  you  make  the 
determination  here  spoken  of  refer  to  God  ?  It,  is 
the  nominative  to  the  verb  determined,  which  does 
not  necessarily  refer  to  the  determination  of  God, 
who  is  not  mentioned  in  the  connexion  of  the  pas- 
sage. Why  may  it  not  as  well  refer  to  the  determi- 
nation of  Judas,  who  is  spoken  of  in  the  preceding 
21st  verse,  Behold,  the  hand  of  him  that  betray eth 
me  is  with  me  on  the  table.     The  supposition  that 

*  Q^ia-fxtvov  (orismenon)  here  translated  determined,  is  a  par- 
ticiple of  the  present  or  imperfect  tense,  or  paulo  post.  fut. 
and  may  be  rendered,  determining,  or  about  to  determine.  There 
is  no  word  in  the  greek,  from  which  our  translators  have  trans- 
lated the  helping  verb,  -was,  thereby  carrying  the  mind  back 
to  some  indeterminate  period,  as  Mr.  Williston  supposes,  be- 
fore the  world  began,  when,  it  is  supposed,  God  determined 
Judas  should  betray  Christ.  Allowing  the  above  criticism  to 
be  accurate,  we  might  read  the  text  thus,  "  Truly  the 
Son  of  man  goeth  as  is  determining,  or  about  to  be  deter- 
mined presently,"  (by  Judas  and  the  chief  priests)  "  but  woe 
unto  that  man  by  whom  he  is  betrayed."  That  it  is  not  ne- 
cessary to  suppose  that  because  the  verb  u^o-pivot,  is  used,  it 
must  have  reference  to  an  eternal  determination  of  God,  is  evi- 
dent from  Acts  xi.  29,  where  the  same  word  u^icray,  is  used  to 
signify  the  determination  of  the  disciples  to  send  relief  to  the 
brethren  which  dwelt  in  Judea.  The  same  word  therefore  is 
used  to  denote  the  determination  of  man,  and  the  determina- 
tion of  God,  Acts  ii.  23.  No  argument  therefore  can  be  in- 
ferred from  the  word,  simply  considered,  to  induce  us  to  refer 
the  determination  spoken  of  in  Luke  xxii.  22,  to  God ;  and  the 
context,  as  has  been  seen,  leads  to  a  contrary  conclusion.  The 
reader,  however,  must  judge  for  himself. 


ON  FOREORDINATION. 

the  determination  refers  either  to  Judas,  or  the  San- 
hedrim, is  strengthened  by  what  is  said  in  verses 
2 — 6.  And  the  chief  priests  and  scribes  sought  how 
they  might  kill  Mm :  for  they  feared  the  people. — 
Then  entered  Satan  into  Judas,  surnamed  Iscariot, 
being  of  the  number  of  the  twelve.  And  he  went  his 
way,  and  communed  with  the  chief  priests  and  cap- 
tains, how  he  might  betray  him  unto  them.  And  they 
were  glad,  and  covenanted  to  give  him  money.  And 
he  promised,  and  sought  opportunity  to  betray  him 
'into  them  in  the  absence  of  the  7nultitude.  From 
this  scripture  it  appears  there  was  a  collusion  be- 
tween Judas,  and  the  chief  priests  and  captains,  in 
which  they  counselled  together  how  they  might  ap- 
prehend Jesus  Christ.  They  stipulated  to  give  Judas 
money,  and  he  agreed  to  betray  him.  All  this  was 
perfectly  known  to  Jesus,  and  therefore  he  spoke  of 
the  treacherous  conduct  of  his  disciple,  Judas,  and 
of  the  determination  which  was  forming  thereon 
among  the  chief  priests.  It  appears  therefore 
".  that  the  text  may,"  without  any  violence,  "  mean" 
something  "  less  than  this,  That  God  had  determin- 
ed his  Son  should  be  betrayed  by  Judas."  The 
most  natural  meaning  is,  That  the  Son  of  man  was 
now  going  to  be  betrayed  according  to  the  determi- 
nation which  resulted  from  the  consultation  between 
the  chief  priests  and  Judas — the  whole  context  leads 
to  this  conclusion.  To  suppose  that  God,  from  all 
eternity  determined  that  Judas  should  betray  the 
Lord  Jesus  into  the  hands  of  wicked  men,  is  to  trans- 
fer the  guilt  of  his  whole  conduct  from  Judas  to  God.- 


34  LETTER  I. 

This  indeed,  is  an  easy  method  to  solve  any  diffi- 
culties in  human  conduct,  by  saying  God  decreed 
they  should  be  so,  and  so  here  is  an  end  of  the  mat- 
ter. It  also  completely  absolves  every  man  from 
blame,  however  wicked  he  may  be,  and  makes  God 
the  only  responsible  agent  in  the  universe. 

2.  You  also  quote  Acts  ii.  23.  Him  being  deliv- 
ered by  the  determinate  counsel  and  foreknowledge  of 
God,  ye  have  taken,  and  by  wicked  hands  have  crucifi- 
ed and  slain,  and  then  add,  "  That  the  crucifixion 
of  Christ  by  the  wicked  Jews,  was  according  to  the 
determinate  counsel  or  fixed  purpose  of  God," 
p.  1 4.  That  this,  and  other  similar  passages  of  scrip- 
ture may  be  satisfactorily  explained,  it  is  important 
to  notice  the  principle  on  which  your  mistaken  ap- 
plication of  them,  is  founded.  According  to  your 
statement,  the  events  spoken  of  respecting  the  wick- 
edness of  the  Jews,  and  others,  in  the  crucifixion  of 
Jesus,  were  the  result  solely  of  the  predetermina- 
tion of  God — this  preordination  is  the  cause,  and  the 
events  the  effect.  Likewise  that  the  predictions  res- 
pecting those  events,  are  predicated,  not  of  God's 
prescience,  but  of  hisforeordination.  But  according 
to  the  scriptural  representation  of  this  subject,  these 
wicked  events,  or  actions,  were  the  result  of  free- 
agency  abused — and  the  predictions  of  the  Jewish 
prophets  respecting  them,  were  predicated,  not  of  a 
predetermination  of  God  that  they  should  be  so,  but 
of  his  infinite  prescience  which  saw  that  they  woidd 
be  so — so  that  neither  the  prescience  of  God,  nor  the 
predictions  of  the  prophets  were  the  cause  of  such 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  3b 

wicked  actions.  God,  foreseeing  that  there  would 
be  such1  a  traitorous  man  as  Judas,  and  such  per- 
sons, as  were  Pilate  and  the  Jews,  might  determine, 
not  that  they  should  possess  these  evil  dispositions, 
nor  that  they  should  be  directed  in  that  identical 
channel,  but  to  overrule  them  when  so  possessed 
and  directed,  for  the  manifestation  of  his  own  infin- 
ite glory.  To  illustrate  this  by  a  comparison — 
General  Washington,  previous  to  his  death,  fore- 
told that  factions  would  arise  in  the  United  States, 
which  would  disturb  the  tranquility  of  the  union — - 
but  it  does  not  follow  from  thence,  that  either  he 
himself,  or  his  predictions,  were  the  cause  of  the 
rise  of  such  factions.  So  God  predicted  that  there 
would  be  such  a  person  as  Judas,  and  such  persons 
as  were  the  Jews,  who  by  abusing  their  moral  agen- 
cy, would  do  thus  and  so  wickedly  ;  but  from 
thence  it  does  not  follow,  that  either  he  himself,  or 
his  predictions  were  the  cause  of  their  wickedness. 
This  distinction  being  kept  in  mind,  it  is  easy  to 
explain  the  text  under  consideration,  without  sup- 
posing God  from  all  eternity,  ordained  the  wicked- 
ness of  the  Jews,  and  the  treachery  of  Judas.  Him, 
being  delivered,  according  the  determinate  counsel 
and  foreknowledge  of  God,  &c.  From  the  infinite 
knowledge  of  God,  he  saw  that  man  would  sin,  and 
involve  himself  and  his  posterity  in  misery  ;  ac- 
cording to  this  knowledge,  his  wise  counsel  led  him 
to  determine  to  deliver  his  Son  to  die  for  the  trans- 
gressors ;  and  hence  it  was  said  by  Paul,  He  was 
delivered  for  our  offences.     As  the   penalty  of  the 


3d  LETTER  I. 

law  which  Adam  disobeyed,  was  death,  and  as 
Christ  came  to  bear  that  penalty,  it  was  necessary 
he  should  die ;  but  it  does  not  follow  that  it  was  ne- 
cessary, any  farther  than  their  own  voluntary  con- 
duct made  it  necessary,  that  Judas  should  betray 
him  with  a  kiss,  and  that  the  Jews  should  smite  him 
with  wicked  hands.  The  determinate  counsel  and 
foreknowledge  of  God  therefore,  do  not  refer  to  his 
being  crucified  and  slain  with  wicked  hands,  but  to 
his  being  delivered  up  as  a  sacrifice  for  sin.  If  you 
say  the  atonement  could  not  have  been  completed 
without  the  aid  of  the  wicked  hands  of  the  Jews, 
you  thereby  transfer  a  part  of  the  merit  of  Christ's 
death  to  them,  to  whom  it  does  not  belong,  and  thus 
rob  Christ  of  his  deserved  honour.  That  God  so 
overruled  their  wickedness,  as  to  make  it  subservi- 
ent to  his  benevolent  purposes  to  mankind,  is  admit- 
ted ;  but  it  should  be  noted,  that  there  is  a  vast  dif- 
ference between  overruling  the  wickedness  of  the 
wicked,  and  between  producing  and  causing  effi- 
ciently, as  you  assert  he  does,  such  wickedness. — 
This  will  also  explain  what  is  meant  by  God's  mean- 
ing it  for  good,  that  Joseph's  brethren  should  sell 
him  into  Egypt.  He  did  not  produce  nor  cause,  the 
wicked,  and  murderous  dispositions,  in  these  breth- 
ren ;  but  he  checked,  restrained,  and  overruled  them, 
according  to  his  good  pleasure,  and  thus  made  them 
subserve  his  purposes  of  future  good  to  mankind. 

3.  If  you  still  insist  that  the  crucifixion  of  Christ 
was  the  cause  of  his  death,  and  that  all  the  circum- 
stances of  it  were  absolutely  necessary,  it  will  fol- 


ON  FOREORDLSTATm.  3/ 

■low  that  they  forcibly  took  his  life  away  from  him — 
and  this  is  expressly  contradictory  to  the  solemn 
declaration  of  Christ  himself,  John  x.  17.  18.  Be- 
cause I  lay  down  my  life  that  I  might  take  it  again. 
No  man  taketh  it  from  ?>ie,  but  I  lay  it  down  of  my- 
self:  I  have  power  to  lay  it  down,  and  I  have  power 
to  take  it  again.  This  commandment  have  I  receiv- 
ed of  my  Father.  In  these  words  the  Lord  Jesus 
claims  the  peculiar  prerogative  of  laying  down  his 
life,  and  of  taking  it  np  again.  And  you  might  as 
well  say,  that  the  soldiers  who  were  placed  to  guard 
the  sepulchre,  and  all  the  accompanying  conduct  of 
the  rulers  were  necessary  to  raise  Christ  from  the 
dead,  as  to  say  their  wickedness  was  necessary  to 
bring  about  his  death.  The  one  is  mentioned  with 
as  much  minuteness  and  precision  as  the  other. — 
But  say  you,  "  all  these  things  were  predicted." 
Granted. — But  these  predictions  were  predicated 
not  of  the  necessity  of  the  events,  but  of  the  infi- 
nite prescience  of  God,  which  saw  that  his  only 
Son  would  meet  with  such  inhuman  and  barbarous 
treatment  from  his  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh. 
All  those  scenes  of  love  and  mercy,  of  forbearance 
and  kindness  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  malice  and 
hatred,  of  malevolence  and  cruelty  on  the  other, 
were  pourtrayed,  as  it  were,  on  the  infinite  mind  ; 
and  also,  by  the  eternal  spirit,  painted  upon  the 
imagination  of  the  inspired  Prophets  who  foretold 
them  ;  but  it  was  seen  at  the  same  time,  the  causes 
of  these  evils  originated  in  the  hearts  of  the  people, 
^ind  not  in  a  predetermination  of  God  :  and  that  the 

D 


38  LETTER  1, 

meritorious  death  of  Christ  was  a  voluntary  sacri- 
fice, originating  from  the  unbounded  love  of  God 
to  sinful  man.  To  say  that  God  delivered  Christ 
into  the  hands  of  Pilate,  is  to  say  that  he,  God,  was 
a  greater  sinner  than  were  the  Jews,  agreeably  to 
the  words  of  Christ,  He  that  delivered  me  unto  thee, 
hath  the  greater  sin. 

4.  You  next  quote  from  chap.  iv.  27,  23.  For 
of  a  truth  against  thy  holy  child  Jesus,  7ohom  thou 
hast  anointed,  both  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate,  with 
the  Gentiles  and  the  people  of  Israel,  were  gathered 
together,  for  to  do  whatsoever  thy  hand  and  thy  counsel 
determined  before  to  be  done.  On  this  you  observe, 
"  The  whole  which  was  done  by  the  murderers  of 
Christ,  Jews  and  Gentiles,  kings  and  people,  is  said 
to  be  the  same  which  the  divine  hand  and  counsel 
determined  before  to  be  done."  p.  14.  Is  it  not 
truly  surprising  that  in  any  passage  where  good  and 
evil  are  spoken  of  as  having  been  done,  that  any 
one  should  without  hesitation,  refer  the  evil  espe- 
cially, immediately  to  God,  as  though  there  were 
no  other  agent  in  the  universe  who  could  do  it  ?  By 
a  little  transposition  of  the  above  passage,  we  have 
a  scriptural  and  rational  sense,  without  being  under 
the  disagreeable  necessity  of  attributing  all  the 
wickedness  of  the  murderers  of  our  Lord  Jesus  to 
God,  out  of  whose  mouth  procccdeth  not  evil  and 
good. 

For  of  a  truth,  both  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate 
with  the  Gentiles,  and  the  people  of  Israel,  were  gath- 
ered  together  against  thy  holy  child  Jesus,  whom 


ON    FOREORDINATION.  39 

thou  hast  anointed  to  do,  wluttsoever  thy  hand  and  thy 
counsel  determined  before  to  be  done.*     According  to 

*  It  may  be  observed  that  Hcwno-ai,  is  in  the  infinitive  mood, 
1.  Aorist,  and  therefore,  being  indefinite  as  to  person  and  num- 
ber, may  very  properly  be  construed  with  Tov  ccyim  vjxi'Sot,  trov 
Iwovv,  thy  holy  child  Jesus,  without  any  violation  of  the  rules  of 
grammar.  In  Luke  i.  72.  the  same  verb  TLowrcu  occurs,  and 
the  only  antecedent  to  this  verb  is  in  verse  68 — Blessed  be  the 
Lord  God  of  Israel,  that  our  translators  understood  the  verb 
in  both  places  in  this  indefinite  sense,  is  evident  from  their  hav- 
ing rendered  it  so  in  their  English  translation  to  do,  to  perform, 

The  observations  of  the  llev.  John  Fletcher  on  the  above 
passage,  are  worthy  of  notice.  He  remarks  in  vol.  iv.  p.  69. 
note — "  With  Episcopius,  and  some  other  learned  critics,  I 
doubt  it  is  not"  rightly  translated.  "  Why  should  it  not  read 
ihus — Acts  iv.  26 — 28.  The  rulers  were  gathered  together, 
against  the  Lord  and  against  his  Christ.  For  of  a  truth 
against  thy  holy  child  Jesus,  whom  thou  hast  anointed  [both 
Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate,  with  the  Gentiles  and  the  people  of 
Israel  were  gathered  together]  for  to  do  whatsoever  thy  hand 
and  counsel  determined  before  to  be  done."  By  putting  the 
clause  "  Both  Herod,"  &c.  in  a  parenthesis,  we  have  this  evan- 
gelical sense,  which  gives  no  handle  to  the  pleaders  for  sin,  Both 
Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate,  &c.  -were  gathered  together  against  thy 
holy  child  Jesus,  -whom  thou  hast  anointed  for  to  do  -whatsoever  thy 
hand  and  thy  counsel  determined  before  to  be  done.  I  prefer  this  read- 
ing to  the  common  one  for  the  following  reasons :  (1)  It  is  per- 
fectly agreeable  to  the  Greek  ;  and  the  peculiar  construction  of 
the  sentence  is  expressive  of  the/>ecz/ftar  earnestness  with  which 
the  Apostle  prayed.  (2)  It  is  attended  with  no  Manichean 
inconveniency.  (3)  It  is  more  agreeable  to  the  context.  For 
if  the  Sanhedrim  were  gathered  together  by  God's  directions  and 
decree,  in  order  to  threaten  the  Apostles,  with  what  propriety 
could  they  say,  v.  29,  "Now  Lord  behold  their  threatnings"  ? 
And  (4),  It  is  strongly  supported  by  v.  30.  where  Peter  [after 
having  observed,  v.  27,  28,  according  to  our  reading,  that  God 
had  anointed  his  holy  child  Jesus,  to  do  all  the  miracles  which 


40  LETTER  I. 

this  construction  all  the  words  arc  retained,  but  by 
a  different  arrangement  of  the  members  of  the  sen- 
tence, we  have  this  scriptural  doctrine  taught  us, 
viz.  That  both  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate,  and  the 
Gentiles,  and  the  people  of  Israel,  were  gathered 
together  against  the  Lord  Jesus,  whom  God  had 
anointed  to  do  whatsoever  his  hand  and  counsel,  de- 
termined before  to  be  done.  This  is  perfectly' 
agreeable  to  the  saying  of  Isaiah,  Ixi.  1.  The 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  God  is  upon  me  ;  because  the  Lord 

he  did  on  earth]  prays  that  now  Christ  is  gone  to  heaven,  the 
rffeits  of  this  powerful  anointing  may  continue,  and  signs  and 
venders  may  still  be  done,  by  the  name  of  his  lioly  child  Jesus  " 

This  interpretation  is  moreover  "  strongly  supported"  by 
what  follows  in  verse  31 — "  And  when  they  had  prayed,  the 
place  was  shaken  where  they  were  assembled  together ;  and 
'hey  were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost;  and  they  spake  the 
■vord  of  God  with  boldness."  Here  was  another  instance  of 
*he  fulfilment  of  the  promise  of  Christ,  to  give  them  the  Holy 
ph  it  to  lead  them  into  all  truth,  in  answer  to  their  earnest 
prayer.  So  that  Christ  continued  to  do  what  the  hand  and 
•ounsel  of  God  determined  to  be  done%  and  thereby  accom,- 
•Viish  the  end  for  which  he  was  anointed. 

Compare  also  the  text  under  consideration,  with  the  second 
Psalm.  Why  do  the  heathen  rage,  and  the  people  imagine  a  vain 
'king  ?  The  kings  of  the  earth  set  themselves,  and  the  rulers  take 
:  ounsel  together,  against  the  Lord,  and  against  his  anointed,  &c. 
This  prediction  was  a  prospective  narration  of  the  illegal  and 
wicked  conduct  of  those  rulers  and  people,  who  were  gathered 
together  against  him  -whom  God  had  anointed  to  make  atonement 
for  sin,  and  to  do  those  miracles  which  were  calculated  to 
convince  the  Gentiles  of  his  power  and  authority  over  all 
things — So  that,  notwithstanding  their  combined  opposition, 
the  heathen  should  be  given  to  him  for  an  inheritance,  and 
the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  his  possession. 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  41 

hath  anointed  me  to  preach  good  tidings  urito  the  meek; 
he  hath  sent  me  to  bind  up  the  broken  hearted,  to 
proclaim  liberty  to  the  captive,  &c.  Compare  this 
with  the  text  in  question,  and  with  the  30th  verse — 
"  By  stretching  forth  thine  hand  to  heal ;  and  that 
signs  and  wonders  may  be  done  by  the  name  of  thy 
holy  child  Jesus,"  and  then  say  if  there  be  not  very 
strong  reasons  for  believing,  that  the  verb  to  do 
refers  to  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  not  to  Herod,  &c. 
But  consult  the  note. 

It  should  furthermore  be  noticed  that  the  text 
says,  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate,  &c.  were  gathered 
together  against  the  Lord.  If  they  were  fulfilling 
the  determinate  counsel,  and  doing  what  the  hand 
and  counsel  of  the  Lord  determined  before  to  be 
done,  how  could  they  be  acting  against  the  Lord  7 
Do  people  act  against  the  Lord,  when  they  go  per- 
fectly  according  to  his  counsel  ?  This  consideration 
itself  is  sufficient  to  convince  any  man  who  is  not 
blinded  by  partial  attachment  to  a  favourite  creed, 
that  your  interpretation  cannot  be  correct. 

5.  You  proceed — "  It  is  a  most  unnatural  evasion 
of  the  force  of  this  passage,  to  explain  it  so  as  to 
make  it  mean,  that  the  wicked  murderers  of  our 
Lord  came  together  to  do  their  duty,  even  all  what- 
soever God  had  commanded  them  should  be  done,'' 
p.  14.  In  this  I  heartily  join  with  you.  But  pray 
sir,  who  gave  it  this  explanation  ?  Have  you  not 
been  labouring  with  all  your  might  to  prove  that  ev- 
ery circumstance  "  in  the  tragical"  sufferings,  and 
death  of  our  Lord  were  perfectly  according  to  th$ 
D  2 


42  LETTER  t 

determinate  counsel  of  God  ?  And  when  men  fulfil 
the  counsel  of  God,  do  they  not  do  their  duty  ?    Or 
must  they  act  contrary  to  that  counsel  in  order  to  do 
their   duty  ?  Or  will  you  here  say  also   that  God's 
commands  and  counsels  are  opposite  ?  If  so,  when 
do  we  do  our  duty,  when  we  obey  the  command,  or 
when  we  fulfil  his  counsel  ?  And  how  am  I  to  know 
what  the  counsel  is,  but  by  the  command  ?  Has  God 
revealed  the  secret  counsel  to  you?  But  were  you  to 
resort  to  this  poor  evasion,  it  would  not  help  the  mat- 
ter any  ;  for  according  to  your  doctrine,  even  this 
opposition  and  contrariety,  is  all  according  to  the 
counsel  of  his  will,  which  you  say,  "  includes  every 
event,"  so  that  God  "  brings  to  pass  every  thing 
which  is  brought  to  pass*5 — consequently,  let  a  man 
do  what  he  will,  however  wicked,  believe  what  he 
may,  however  absurd,  it  is  all  according  to  the  coun- 
sel of  God's  will !     "  How,  indeed,  must  the  omnis- 
cient God  look  upon  such  explanations  of  his  word  ?" 
••Let  an   expositor  take    such  liberties  with  the 
whole  Bible,  and  he  might  as  well  make  a  new  Bible 
at  once,  and  then  he  wTould  be  no  longer  troubled 
with  the  old  one,  but  might  believe  what  he  pleased," 
p.  14,  15.     True  enough;  for  what  good  does  the 
Bible  do  us,  if  there  be  a  decree  which  is  contrary 
^o  the   commands  recorded   in  the  Bible ;  and   if 
we  are  governed  by  a  secret,  irresistible  influence  ? 
When  a  man -can  persuade  himself,   That  God  or- 
dains sin,  and  yet  forbids  it, — that  all  things  are  ac- 
cording to  the  counsel  of  his  will,  and  yet  that  many 
things  are  opposed  to  this  counsel,  (see.  p.  11.)  that 
all  things  are  according  to  God^s  good  pleasure,  and 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  43 

yet,  that  many  things  are  displeasing  to  him,  and 
"  abhorrent  to  his  holy  nature," — that  a  man  acts 
against  the  Lord,  while  doing  according  to  the  deter- 
minate counsel  of  his  wrfL — I  say,  when  a  man  can 
persuade  himself  to  believe  in  such  obvious  contra- 
dictions, he  may  not  only  give  up  the  Bible,  which 
contains  a  consistent  system  of  truth,  but  he  may 
also  give  up  reason  and  common  sense.* 

*  "  But  since  such  a  comment  has  been  given,  8tc."  p.  15. 
Here  you  have,  perhaps  undesignedly,  misrepresented  my  ar- 
guments by  intimating  that  I  asserted,  the  Jews,  when  cruci- 
fying Christ,  were  doing  their  duty — Whereas  nothing  could  be 
farther  from  my  thoughts.  "  The  disputant  on  the  Arminian 
side"  it  is  true  said,  M  that  the  counsel  of  the  Lord  meant  his 
revealed  will,"  and  also  that  it  was  revealed,  impostors 
should  die,  and  that  consequently  the  Jews  were  assembled 
together  to  put  Christ  to  death  as  an  impostor — And  he  is  of 
the  same  opinion  still.  They  certainly  never  put  him  to 
death  as  the  Son  of  God.  They  said  he  was  a  Samaritan,  ami 
had  a  devil,  John  viii.  48.  So  careful  were  they  not  to  have 
him  crucified  as  the  promised  J\fessiah,  nor  as  the  real  King  of 
the  Jews,  that  they  requested  Pilate  to  alter  the  inscription 
on  the  cross.  Write  not,  said  they,  The  King  of  the  Jews  ;  but 
ihat  he  said,  I  am  the  Khig  of  the  Jew* ,  John  six.  21.  From 
these  passages,  and  indeed  from  the  whole  affair,  it  is  evident, 
that  they  believed,  or  pretended  to  believe,  Christ  was  an  im- 
postor ;  and  therefore,  as  such,  they  crucified  him.  Is  it  just 
then  for  you  to  represent  me  as  saying  that  they  did  do  their 
duty  ?  They  pretended  to  do  this,  I  grant,  and  so  must  you.  If 
he  -were  not  a  malefactor,  said  they,  ive  -would  not  have  deliver- 
ed him  unto  thee,  John  xviii.  30.  Who  can  avoid  seeing  from 
these  words,  that  they  considered  him  a  malefactor,  and  as  this 
was  directly  the  reverse  from  the  character  he  claimed,  they 
accused  him  of  imposture.  And  that  they  plead  a  legal  sen- 
tence against  him  is  evident  from  these  words,  We  have  a 
lawi  and  by  our  law  he  wghi  fl  die,  because  he  matte  himself  Ihs 


44  LETTER  I. 

6.  From  the  comment  you  have  given  to  the 
above-mentioned  texts,  you  seem  to  suppose  that  it 
was  absolutely  necessary  for  Christ  to  be  crucified 
with  wicked  hands,  in  order  to  bring  about  his  death, 
p.  16 — 18.  That  it  was  indispensably  necessary 
that  Christ  should  die  to  make  an  atonement  for  sin, 
is  unquestionably  true.  But  to  suppose  he  died  on- 
ly in  consequence  of  being  nailed  to  the  cross,  with 
the  other  barbarous  acts  of  his  enemies,  is  to  ac- 
count for  his  death  in  an  ordinary  way  ;  that  is,  in 
a  way  any  one  else  might  have  died  with  the  same 

Son  of  God,  ibid  xix.  7.  Their  argument  was  this — He  mak- 
eth  himself  the  Son  of  God  ;  but  ive  consider  him  a  malefactor, 
a  perverter  of  the  nation  ;  and  as  he  pretends  to  be  what  he  is 
not,  he  is  therefore  an  impostor,  and  we  accordingly  demand 
sentence  of  condemnation  against  him.  But  can  you  fairly 
infer  from  this  statement  of  facts,  that  the  enemies,  and  accu- 
sers of  the  Lord  Jesus  did  do  their  duty  ?  If  their  accusations 
had  been  predicated  of  truth,  when  they  called  him  an  impos- 
tor, they  would  have  done  their  duty;  and  this  was  what  I 
contended  for  in  the  debate. 

Whether  this  was  the  meaning  or  not  cf  the  above  text,  is 
another  question.  I  grant  that  I  gave  it  as  my  opinion  in  the 
public  debate  ;  but  upon  more  mature  consideration,  I  think  I 
was  mistaken  ;  but  a  misunderstanding  of  an  insulated  pas- 
sage of  scripture,  by  no  means  affects  the  main  question, 
which  is  amply  supported  by  other  texts.  However,  as  it  is 
disingenious  to  contend  for  an  erroneous  interpretation  of 
scripture,  after  being  convinced,  1  freely  give  it  up.  But  re- 
member, I  do  not  give  up  my  former  exposition,  to  embrace 
yours,  which  I  coRsider  far  worse — neither  have  your  unscrip- 
tural  arguments  convinced  me.  If,  indeed,  Christ  had  been 
an  impostor,  as  they  said  he  was,  they  would  have  done  their 
duty  by  putting  him  to  death,  because  this  was  the  revealed 
■will  of  Cod  respecting  impostors.    And  that  God's  counsel  is 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  45 

treatment.  Whereas  his  conception  and  death  were 
both  miraculous.  To  deny  this,  is  to  strip  his  suffer- 
ings and  death  of  all  that  merit  which  the  scriptures 
uniformly  ascribe  to  them.  But  if  miraculous,  as  it 
certainly  was,  he  did  not  die  by  crucifixion — and 
this  is  farther  evident  from  his  own  words,  before 
quoted,  /  lay  dozen  my  life — /  have  power  to  lay  it 
dmim,  and  I  have  power  to  take  it  again:  And  after 
having  sufficiently  suffered  to  answer  the  wonderful 
design  of  love,  it  is  said,  He  gave  up  the  ghost,  or 
dismissed  his  spirit.  His  sufferings  and  his  death 
were  all  voluntary.  Furthermore  when  the  soldiers 
came  to  break  the  legs  of  those  who  hung  on  the 
cross,  they  broke  the  legs  of  the  two  malefactors, 
but  when  they  came  to  Jesus,  they  brake  not  his 
legs,  because  he  was  already  dead,  and  Pilate  mar- 
veiled  that  he  was  so  soon  dead,    John  xix.   32,  33. 

his  revealed  will,  I  still  contend,  because  I  kaow  of  no  other 
counsel,  but  that  which  he  has  revealed. 

Respecting  those  who  crucified  the  Lord  Jesus,  having"  done 
their  duty,  so  long  as  you  contend  as  you  have  done,  that  their 
wicked  conduct  was  decreed,  and  therefore  absolutely  neces- 
sary, you  roust  admit  that  they  did  do  their  duty,  (although 
contrary  to  his  prohibition,  Touch  not  mine  anointed)  "  even 
all  that  the  Lord  had"  decreed  ;  and  therefore  all  those  con- 
sequences  which  you  have  inferred  from  my  observations,  re- 
tort upon  yourself— For  if  as  you  insinuate,  God  hath  a  decre- 
tal will,  contrary  to  that  revealed  in  the  Bible,  the  latter  is  en- 
tirely superceded  by  the  former ;  and  therefore  you  "  may  give 
up  the  Bible,  and  believe  what  you  please."  Is  it  not  surpris- 
ing that  you  should  profess  to  derive  your  knowledge  of  the 
decretal  will  from  the  Bible,  and  yet  suppose  it  contrary  tQ 
what  i*  revealed  in  the  Bible  P    Wonderful  discovery  ! 


40  LETTER  I. 

Mark  xv.  44.  This  is  another  evidence  that  he  did 
not  die  by  crucifixion  ;  and  if  crucifixion  was  not 
the  cause  of  his  death,  it  was  not  essentially  necessa- 
ry to  bring  it  about.  If  it  be  asked  how  else  he 
could  have  died  ?  It  is  answered,  that  it  is  not  ab- 
solutely necessary  to  answer  this  question  ;  for  what 
might  have  been  done,  had  the  state  of  the  moral 
world  been  different  from  what  it  was,  we  cannot 
tell — However  we  have  some  data  to  guide  our 
minds  even  in  this  critical  enquiry.  Christ  said  in 
his  submissive  prayer  in  the  garden  of  Gethsemanc, 
while  agonizing  under  the  weight  of  divine  justice, 
My  soul  is  exceeding  sorrowful,  even  unto  death — 
Matth.  xxvi.  38,  39.  Christ  never  spoke  without 
meaning;  and  while  he  was  sweating  as  it  were 
great  drops  of  blood,  no  doubt  but  the  pungent  ago- 
nies of  death  were  already  on  him — but  being  in  an 
agony,  he  prayed  the  more  earnestly,  that  the  cup  of 
divine  indignation  might,  for  the  present, pass  from 
him*  This  prayer  was  heard,  agreeably  to  the  de- 
claration of  the  apostle,  Heb.  v.  7.  Who  in  the  days 
of  his  flesh,  when  he  had  offered  up  prayers  and  sup* 
plications,  with  strong  crymg  and  tears,  unto  him  that 
was  able  to  save  him  from  death,  AND  WAS 
HEARD,  in  that  he  feared.  Collate  this  passage 
with  our  Saviour's  prayer — My  soul  is  exceeding 
sorrowful,  even  unto  DEATH.  He  offered  up — 
strong  crying  and  tears  to  him  that  was  able  to  save 
him  FROM  DEATH,  and  xoas  heard.  Now  it  is 
certain  he  was  not  ultimately  saved  from  death;  be- 
cause he  did  die,  while  hanging  upon  the  cross, — ■ 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  4? 

The  death,  therefore,  from  which  he  was  saved, 
was  that,  the  bitter  pangs  of  which  was  indicated  by 
his  profuse  sweat,  and  by  the  extreme  agony  of  his 
soul,  and  which  he  began  to  feel  while  in  the  gar- 
den. It  is  therefore  both  scriptural  and  reasonable 
to  conclude,  that  if  the  weight  of  divine  justice, 
which  was  armed  with  terrible  vengeance  against 
sinners,  and  which  Christ  came  to  suffer  in  our  stead, 
had  not  been  suspended,  he  would  have  expired 
under  its  mighty  load  in  the  garden. 

But,  say  you,  "  If  Christ  had  not  been  crucified 
with  wicked  hands,  &c.  the  predictions  would  have 
failed  of  their  accomplishment."  Granted — But  if 
the  Almighty  had  not  foreseen,  that  Judas  would  be- 
tray him,  and  that  the  Jews  would  crucify  him,  there 
would  have  been  no  predictions  respecting  these 
events.  The  events  themselves  were  a  secondary 
cause  of  the  predictions  ;  for  they  were  all  present 
to  the  eternal  mind,  from  whom  nothing  is  hid.  It 
is  not  contended  thot  Christ  was  not  crucified ;  but 
that  crucifixion  was  not  the  immediate  cause  of  his 
death.  And  the  wilful  and  voluntary  treachery  of 
Judas,  and  the  horrid  and  unnecessitated  rebellion 
of  the  Jews,  made  it  necessary,  so  far  as  such  hu- 
man and  wicked  agents  can  make  any  thing  neces- 
sary, for  Jesus  to  be  crucified.  This  necessity, 
however,  did  not  arise  from  an  eternal  order  of  God, 
that  they  should  and  must  do  so,  and  therefore  could 
not  have  done  otherwise. 

7.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  God  worketh  all 
things  after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will ;  but  it  is  not 


48  LETTER  h 

according  to  the  counsel  of  his  will,  that  man  should 
sin.  This  is  evident  from  the  prohibitary  com- 
mand, Thou  shah  not  cat  of  it,  for  in  the  day  thou 
eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely  die,  Gen  ii.  1 7.  As 
we  know  of  no  other  counsel,  than  that  revealed  in 
the  Bible,  we  think  ourselves  justifiable  in  believ- 
ing it  contrary  to  God's  will  for  man  to  sin; 
because  such  is  the  revelation,  which  he  has  giv- 
en of  his  will  throughout  the  whole  scriptures. 
As  then  the  counsel  of  his  will  is  always  accord- 
ing to  justice,  holiness,  truth,  wisdom,  and  good- 
ncss,  he  could  not,  consistently  with  his  nature, 
7vill,  that  man  should  be  unjust,  unholy,  untrue,  un- 
wise, and  bad.  All  therefore  which  is  said  in  the 
scriptures  respecting  God's  doing  His  pleasure,  and 
working  all  things  after  the  counsel  of  his  will  must 
be  so  interpreted  as  to  exclude  all  injustice,  unholi- 
ness,  and  every  other  species  of  wickedness  from  the 
works  and  ways  of  God.  When  God  had  finished 
his  work  of  creation  in  six  days,  it  is  said  all  was 
very  good.  But  as  yet,  sin  had  not  been  introduced. 
Your  reference  therefore  to  the  work  of  creation,  to 
prove  that  all  sin  is  after  the  counsel  of  his  will,  is 
foreign  to  the  point.  To  make  this  answer  your 
purpose,  you  must  first  prove  that  sin  is  very  good, 
and  that  sin  was  included  among  the  works  of  God, 
in  the  six  days  of  creation.  But  this  you  can  no 
more  do,  than  you  can  prove  that  holiness  is  sinful. 
These  things  being  considered,  it  is  truly  surprising 
that  you  should  refer  to  this  sublime  display  of  the 
power  and  wisdom  of  God,  to  support  your  doctrine 
that  God  has  included  all  sin,  even  "  every  sin  in 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  45) 

the  universe"  in  his  "  perfect  plan."  God  willeth 
that  man  should  not  sin,  but  be  holy  ;  and  therefore, 
if  he  worketh  all  things  according  to  the  counsel  of 
his  will,  he  cannot  be  the  "  efficient  cause"  of  those 
sinful  actions,  which  the  scriptures  ascribe  exclu- 
sively to  wicked  men  and  devils. 

8.  Taking  this  idea  along  with  us,  we  may  have 
a  scriptural  and  consistent  interpretation  of  those 
scriptures  which  you  have  quoted  in  p.  1 1,  12,  13,  to 
prove  your  doctrine  ;  without  imputing  "  all  the 
bins  in  the  universe"  to  the  Almighty.  Prov.  xix. 
21.  There  are  many  devices  in  a  marts  heart; 
nevertheless  the  counsel  of  the  Lord,  that  shall  staud. 
Here  the  counsel  of  the  Lord,  is  put  in  opposition  to 
the  many  devices  in  a  marts  heart.  In  this  passage 
therefore  there  are  some  things  mentioned  which 
are  not  after  the  counsel  of  his  will,  even  all  those 
evil  devices,  which  are  in  a  marts  heart.  This  you 
admit,  by  saying  that-  the  "  devices  ii;  the  hearts  of 
Joseph's  brethren"  to  "  kill  him,"  to  "  leave  him 
in  the  pit,"  to  "  restore  him  to  his  father,"  did  not 
agree  with  the  counsel  of  the  Lord,"  and  therefore 
"  did  not  stand,"  p.  12.  Is  it  not  surprising  that 
you  should  quote  this  text  to  prove  that  "  every  sin 
in  the  universe  is  decreed,"  and  then  in  your  com- 
ment admit  that  there  were  many  sinful  devices,  in 
the  heart  of  Joseph's  brethren  which  "  did  not 
agree  with  the  counsel  of  the  Lord  ?"  Are  all  things 
agreeable  to  God's  counsel,  and  many  things  disa- 
greeable to  it  ?  O  error,  how  dost  thou  bind  thy  ad- 
mirers with  the  knot  of  contradiction  I  The  text  he 


50  LETTER  I. 

der  consideration  is  a  full  confirmation  of  our  doc- 
trine, that  the  counsel  of  the  Lord,  which  is  always 
according  to  righteousness,  shall  stand,  although 
there  may  be  a  thousand  evil  devices  in  meir s  hearts 
against  it ;  for  there  is  no  wisdom,  nor  understanding 
nor  counsel  against  the  Lord,  Prov.  xxi.  30. — 
"  This,"  say  you,  "  cannot  mean,  that  men  form 
no  projects  or  schemes,  to  oppose  the  Lord ;  or 
which,  if  carried  into  execution,  would  not  mar  the 
work  of  his  hands  ;  but  this  is  undoubtedly  meant, 
that  his  counsel  will  stand  in  spite  of  them,"  p.  12. 
Here  is  some  truth  and  some  error.  By  admitting 
that  men  form  "  projects  or  schemes"  to  oppose 
the  Lord,  you  admit  what  we  contend  for,  and  there- 
by contradict  your  main  proposition,  That  all 
events,  (for  certainly  "  projects  and  schemes"  are 
events)  are  after  the  counsel  of  his  will.  But  when 
you  insinuate  that  none  of  the  "  projects  or  schemes" 
of  the  wicked  "  are  carried  into  execution,"  you 
contradict  fact.  Was  not  the  wicked  project  of 
Cain  carried  into  execution,  when  he  slew  his  bro- 
ther ?  Was  not  the  wicked  "  project"  of  David  car- 
ried into  execution,  when  he  ordered  Joab  to  put 
Uriah  in  the  front  of  the  battle,  that  he  might  die  ? 
Or  will  you  say  that  these,  and  a  thousand  other 
murderous  "  projects  or  schemes"  were  according 
to  the  counsel  of  the  Lord  ?  But  if  murderous  and 
adulterous  "  projects  and  devices"  are  not  against 
the  Lord,  pray  tell  what  are  ?  Psal.  cxv.  3.  But 
our  God  is  in  the  heavens,  he  hath  done  whatsoever 
he  pleased ;  also,  cxxxv.  6.,  Whatsoever  the  Lord 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  51 

pleased,  that  did  he  in  heaven,  and  in  earth,  in  the 
seas,  and  in  all  deep  places,  p.  12.  You  quote  and 
apply  these  precious  texts  of  scripture,  as  if  you 
thought  we  disbelieved  that  God  did  whatever  he 
pleases.  This  we  never  doubted.  But  the  ques- 
tion is,  whether  he  pleases  to  work  sin  in  the  hearts 
and  lives  of  sinners  ;  or  whether  he  pleased  to  or- 
dain "  all  the  sin  in  the  universe."  So  you  assert, 
and  to  substantiate  this  sentiment,  so  dishonourable 
to  God,  you  quote  these  scriptures.  But  that  they 
were  never  designed  to  support  such  an  horrid  sent- 
iment, is  abundantly  manifest  from  the  clearest  tes- 
timony of  scripture.  Psal.  v.  4 — 6,  For  thou  art 
not  a  God  that  hath  pleasure  in  wickedness  :  neither 
shall  evil  dwell  zcith  thee*  The  foolish  shall  not 
s  tand  in  thy  sight :  thou  hatest  all  workers  of  iniquity. 
Thou  shalt  destroy  them  that  speak  leasing :  the 
Lord  will  abhor  the  bloody  and  deceitful  man.  Ac- 
cording to  these  texts  of  scripture,  the  Lord  is  so 
far  from  being  pleased  with  sin,  that  it  is  said  in  a 
solemn  appeal  to  him  in  prayer,  That  he  hath  not 
pleasure  in  wickedness, — that  he  hateth  all  workers 
of  iniquity, — that  he  will  abhor  the  bloody  and  de~ 
ceitful  man.  According  to  your  doctrine  he  hath 
decreed  all  things,  he  "  brings  every  thing  to  pass, 
which  is  brought  to  pass,"  and  that  all  things  are 
not  only  according  to  the  counsel  of  his  will,  but  ac- 
cording to  his  pleasure.  The  north  and  south  poles 
are  not  more  opposite  one  to  the  other,  than  are 
these  sentiments  of  yours,  and  the  doctrine  expres- 
sed in  the  above  passages  of  scripture.     Can  the 


52  LETTER  I. 

Almighty  be  pleased  with  that  which  his  soul  hatetiw 
Again  :  Jer.  xxxii.  35.  To  cause  their  sons  and 
daughters  to  pass  through  the  fire  unto  Moloch,whichI 
commanded  them  not,  neither  came  it  into  my  mind 
"hat  tJiey  should  do  this  abomination,  to  cause  Judah 
lo  sin.  Could  the  Almighty  ordain  and  decree  that 
which  never  came  into  his  mind  that  they  should  do, 
and  which  he  commanded  not  ?  This  text  is  as  point- 
ed against  your  sentiment  as  any  thing  can  be.— 
You  say  God  is  the  "  efficient  cause"  of  sin— the 
text  says,  they  caused  Judah  to  sin.  Which  shall 
ive  believe  in  this  case  ?  Let  God  be  true,  and  every 
man,  who  dare  contradict  him,  a  liar, 

9.  You  have  a  curious  remark  on  this  text,  p.  22: 
After  labouring  to  prove  what  we  never  denied,  nor 
no  one  else,  that  God  knew  they  would  do  these 
abominations,  you  say,  "  But  this  does  not  prove 
that  God  did  not  determine  to  give  them  up  to  do 
these  things."  They  were  doubtless  left  to  follow 
their  own  free  will  in  this  respect,  as  well  as  in  all 
others.  But  what  has  this  giving  up  to  do  with  your 
principle,  which  asserts,  that  this  very  abominable 
thing  which  his  soul  hateth,  is  nevertheless  accord- 
ing to  the  counsel  of  his  will  ?  Nay,  that  he  decreed 
it  from  all  eternity.  But  how  is  this  idea,  respect- 
nig  their  being  given  "  up  to  do  tjiese  things,"  con- 
sistent with  what  you  say  in  the  note,  p.  23  ?  "  If 
all  God  did  to  sinners  was  merely  to  withdraw  from 
them,  and  leave  their  hearts  to  put  forth  indepen- 
dent volitions  (if  this  were  possible),  though  it  might 
account  for  their  continuance  in  sin,   yet  it  would 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  53 

not  account  for  their  commiting  just  such  sins  as 
they  do."  In  the  first  place,  when  a  noted  passage 
of  scripture  stood  in  the  way  of  your  decrees,  you 
could  abandon  them,  by  turning  Arminian,  and  talk 
about  their  being  given  "  up  to  do  these  things  ;w 
but  lest  some  of  your  readers  should  suspect  you 
did  not  implicitly  follow  Dr.  Hopkins  and  others, 
you  return  to  your  decrees,  and  tell  us  it  will  not  do 
merely  to  say  they  are  "  left,"  or  "  given  up,"  be- 
cause that  will  not  account  for  their  "  committing 
just  such  sins  as  they  do."  Did  those  wicked  peo- 
ple only  "  continue  in  sin,"  in  a  general  way,  when 
they  made  their  children  pass  through  the  fire  to 
Moloch,  or  did  they  commit  "just  such  sins  as  they 
did"  ?  Their  particular  sin  seems  to  be  designated 
with  much  precision  by  the  Prophet,  so  that  we 
may  safely  conclude  that  they  committed  "  just  such 
sins  as  they  did;"  and  therefore  according  to  your 
"  foundation  work,"  it  was  decreed ;  and  yet  ac- 
cording to  your  comment  they  were  only  "  given 
up"  to  do  it;  but  according  to  the  express  declara- 
tion of  the  P  'ophet,  which  is  of  more  value  than 
a  thousand  such  quibbling  comments,  it  was  neither 
decreed  nor  commanded.  "  God  decreed  that  they 
should  commit  just  such  sins  as  they  do  ;"  and  yet 
there  are  some  sins  which  he  only  gave  them  up  to 
do" — so  says  your  doctrine  ;  and  I  think  it  will 
puzzle  you  a  little  to  prove  both  assertions  true, 
and  reconcile  the  various  contradictions  which  have 
"  arisen  to  view"  in  the  examination  of  this  sub- 
E  2 


54  LETTER  I. 

jcct.  You  arc,  however,  bound  to  do  it,  or  give 
up  your  system. 

From  the  above  cited  scriptures,  (and  many  more 
of  a  similar  import  might  be  added)  I  think  it  is 
unequivocally  proved,  that  God  has  not  foreordain- 
ed whatsoever  comes  to  pass.  For  it  is  impossible 
he  should  ordain  that  in  which  he  hath  no  pleasure, 
which  he  hateth,  and  which  his  soul  abhorreth,  and 
which  never  came  into  his  mind  they  should  do,  and 
which  he  commanded  not. 

10.  I  cannot  but  notice  another  instance  of  your 
nfethod  of  confounding  things  which  have  no  con- 
nexion. In  the  case  of  Joseph  and  his  brethren, 
you  confound  God's  providential  manner  of  restrain- 
ing, checking,  and  overruling  the  evil  propensities 
and  designs  of  these  wicked  brethren,  and  so  mak- 
ing them  subservient  to  his  purpose,  with  his  having 
decreed  from  all  eternity  that  they  should  possess 
those  evil  propensities,  and  that  they  should  form 
those  wicked  designs,  and  that  they  should  be  di- 
rected in  that  particular  way.  If  the  world  had  not 
been  wicked,  if  the  Egyptians  had  not  been  sunk 
into  idolatry  and  sensuality,  if  the  brethren  of  Jo- 
seph had  not  been  jealous  traitors,  and  if  the  Ca- 
naanites  had  not  been  grievous  sinners  against  God, 
•here  would  have  been  no  necessity  for  the  slavery 
of  Joseph,  the  scourge  of  famine,  the  ten  succes- 
sive plagues  of  Egypt,  &c.  These  were  events 
which  originated  from  the  depravity  and  wicked- 
ness of  the  times,  and  not  from  a  predetermining 
cause  in  the  infinitely  holy  God.     Things  being  as 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  55 

they  were,  through  the  prevalence  of  the  wicked 
and  perverse  conduct  of  men,  God  so  checked  and 
overruled  their  nefarious  designs,  by  his  particular 
providence,  as  to  make  them  subserve  the  develope- 
ment  of  his  benevolent  purposes  to  the  sons  of  men. 
The  scourge  of  famine  was  sent  upon  the  land  of 
Canaan,  to  punish  its  inhabitants  for  their  wicked- 
ness, and  Joseph's  brethren  for  their  hatred  to  him, 
and  duplicity  to  their  aged  father;  while  Joseph 
was  highly  exalted  in  Egypt,  as  a  reward  for  his 
fidelity,  and  to  keep  much  people  alive.  To  effect 
this  gracious  purpose,  the  murderous  disposition  of 
his  brethren  was  checked,  and  their  hearts  turned 
to  sell  him.  All  this  may  be  seen,  and  the  hand 
of  God  adored,  without  resorting  to  the  horrid  idea 
that  God  from  all  eternity  decreed  the  wickedness 
of  all  these  nations  and  people,  that  he  might  have 
an  opportunity  to  display  his  sovereignty  in  pun- 
ishing them  in  this  life  with  temporal  plagues,  and 
in  the  life  to  come,  with  everlasting  torments.  In 
all  the  abovementioned  transactions,  we  see  wis- 
dom and  mercy,  contrasted  with  folly  and  malevo- 
lence. 

11.  So  also,  your  observations  in  page  25,  seem 
founded  on  the  erroneous  supposition  that  the  prov- 
idence of  God  is  only  seen  and  acknowledged  in 
connexion  with  your  doctrine  of  decrees  ;  whereas 
nothing  can  be  more  incorrect.  God  governs  the 
world  in  wisdom.  He  rules  mankind  as  free,  re- 
sponsible agents,  and  not  by  a  dire  necessity,  as 
your  doctrine  supposes.     And  we  have  no  hesita- 


66  LETTER  L 

tion  in  saying,  because  both  scripture  and  the  na- 
ture of  things  dictate  it  to  us,  that  the  wise  and  be- 
nevolent providence  of  God,  extends  to  all  causes 
and  events,  and  that  it  so  checks  and  restrains  the 
evil  designs  of  the  wicked,  and  guides,  directs,  and 
nourishes  the  good  designs  of  the  righteous,  as  to 
make  them  all  tend  to  his  own  infinite  glory,  and 
the  ultimate  good  of  those  who  love  him,  and  keep 
his  commandments.  So  that  although  he  did  not 
decree  that  mankind  should  sin,  yet  out  of  tender 
compassion  to  them,  he  has  provided  a  sovereign 
remedy  for  all  their  malidies  ;  and  mercifully  assists 
those  who  are  willing  to  accept  of  its  healing  in- 
iluence,  in  making  a  saving  application  of  it  to  their 
souls.  He  daily  feeds  and  nourishes  his  faithful 
children  with  the  consolations  of  his  Spirit,  and  the 
sincere  milk  of  his  word,  that  they  may  grow  up  into 
Christ  in  all  things,  who  is  their  living  head.  He 
maketh  the  sun  to  rise  on  the  just  and  unjust,  and 
sendeth  rain  upon  the  evil  and  the  good*  He  water- 
eth  the  earth  that  it  may  bud,  and  bring  forth  fruit 
abundantly  for  man  and  beast.  His  ways  are  ways 
of  pleasantness,  and  all  his  paths  are  peace.  Every 
good  and  every  perfect  gift  cometh  down  from  the 
Father  of  lights,  with  whom  there  is  no  variableness, 
neither  shadow  of  turning.  And  in  all  the  works 
and  ways  of  God,  we  see  no  spots  of  impurity,  no 
signs  of  eternal  hatred  to  one  part  of  the  human 
family,  stiled  reprobates.  Your  unfounded  notion 
of  decrees,  and  the  scriptural  doctrine  of  provi- 
dence; are  as  different  as  are  the  supreme  deities 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  5-7 

worshipped  by  the  Persians,  which  you  have  men- 
tioned.* Your  system  makes  all  evil  originate  in 
the  author  of  all  good, — whereas  the  other  repre- 
sents him  as  seated  upon  a  throne  of  justice,  good- 
ness and  wisdom,  governing  the  world  in  righteous- 
ness, forbidding  and  restraining  sin,  as  far  as  is  con- 
sistent with  man's  nature  as  a  responsible  agent ; 
and  encouraging  holiness  in  his  creatures,  by  all 
those  commanding  motives  which  are  adapted  to 
the  nature,  circumstances,  and  capacity  of  proba- 
tioners for  eternity.     We  are  not  therefore  under 

*  The  following-  texts  have  been  supposed  to  support  the 
doctrine  of  foreordination.  I  am  the  Lord,  and  there  is  none 
else.  I  form  the  light,  and  create  darkness  :  I  make  peace, 
and  create  evil :  I  the  Lord  do  all  these  things.  Isa.  xlvi.  6,  7. 
No  doubt  but  God  designed  in  these  words  to  assert  his  sove- 
reign authority  over  all  things,  in  opposition  to  the  peurile 
notion  of  the  Persians,  who  invented  the  doctrine  of  two  su- 
preme Deities,  the  one  the  author  of  light  and  peace,  the  other 
the  author  of  darkness  and  evil.  In  the  beginning  God  made 
the  heavens,  and  the  earth,  and  divided  the  light  from  the 
darkness.  After  man  had  rebelled,  €Jod  sent  the  evil  of  ex- 
pulsion from  paradise  upon  him,  as  a  just  punishment  for  his 
disobedience.  And  in  every  age  of  the  world  God  inflicts 
temporal  judgments  upon  mankind  for  their  wickedness.  Is 
there  evil  in  the  city,  and  the  Lord  hath  not  done  it.  Plague,  pes- 
tilence, sword  and  famine,  are  all  the  messengers  of  his  ven- 
geance which  he  sends  upon  cities  devoted  to  wickedness. 
Every  man  ought  to  know  that  there  is  a  difference  between 
moral  and  natxiral  evil.  The  latter  is  often,  and  perhaps  al- 
ways, a  judicial  punishment,  which  the  Lord  inflicts  upon  sin- 
ners for  their  immoral  conduct.  But  if  moral  evil  is  also  crea- 
ted by  the  Almighty,  so  that  sinners  perfectly  answer  the 
mind  of  God  when  guilty  of  it,  how  can  they  be  justly  punish, 
ed  for  it  ? 


63  LETTER  L 

the  necessity  of  seeking  shelter,  under  your  hetcro- 
genious  doctrine  of  decrees,  in  order  to  avoid  the 
phantasm  of  chance.  Those  who  attribute  this  fairy 
doctrine  to  us,  are  as  unjust  as  your  doctrine  rep- 
resents God  to  be  ;  which  says,  that  he  from  all 
eternity  decreed  that  men  should  fulfil  the  counsel 
of  his  will  by  sinning,  and  then  sends  them  to  hell 
for  so  doing. 

12.  In  page  6,  you  say  "These  decrees  also 
made  it  sure,  that  no  more  rational  creatures  would 
apostatize,  or  remain  in  apostacy,  than  the  greatest 
good  of  the  universe  made  necessary."  As  this  is 
a  favourite  argument  with  all  the  Hopkinsian  wri- 
ters, it  may  not  be  amiss  to  spend  a  few  thoughts 
upon  it.  The  greatest  good  of  the  universe  must  be 
the  greatest  number  of  intelligent  creatures  made 
happy.  In  regard  to  God  himself,  he  is,  from  the 
essential  properties  of  his  nature,  happy — supreme- 
ly so.  If  therefore  the  decrees  of  God  respect  the 
greatest  good  of  the  universe,  he  must  have  sought 
the  happiness  of  all  his  intelligent  creatures.  For 
certainly  the  greatest  possible  good  of  the  universe, 
would  be  the  order,  harmony,  and  perfection  of  the 
whole,  both  in  the  physical  and  moral  world.  Ac- 
cording to  this  mode  of  reasoning,  take  your  decrees 
for  the  data,  universalism  would  be  the  result.  But 
such  a  result  is  expressly  contradicted  by  scripture. 
Now,  if  we  lay  down  a  first  principle,  from  which  a 
conclusion  necessarily  follows,  which  contradicts  an 
established  and  admitted  fact,  that  principle,  must 
be  false. 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  59 

On  this  ground  therefore  your  principle  is  proved 
false.  The  end  proposed  by  it  is  not  obtained,  and 
therefore  it  is  not  good.  No  doubt  but  God  sought 
the  greatest  good  of  the  universe,  consistently  with 
his  own  nature,  and  the  nature  of  man — and  consist- 
ently with  these  natures,  the  greatest  good  is  ob- 
tained, because  man  refuses  to  have  more — A  part 
pf  the  human  family  choose  death  in  the  error  of 
their  ways.  And  to  have  made  man  a  necessary 
agent,  would  have  been  to  make  him  any  thing  be- 
sides an  intelligent  creature.  What  would  have 
been  the  result  of  such  a  state  of  things,  we  cannot 
tell,  because  we  have  no  fact  to  reason  from.  But 
if  God  have  decreed  all  things,  and  that  consequently 
all  things  are  according  to  his  will ;  and  if,  never- 
theless, a  part  are  miserable  after  all,  it  argues 
either  a  want  of  goodness  or  power ;  so  that  all 
you  say  about  the  "  greatest  good  of  the  universe," 
amounts  to  nothing. 

13.  To  say  that  the  Almighty  could  not  make  all 
men  happy,  is  to  limit  his  power-,  and  to  say  he 
would  ?wt,  is  to  circumscribe  his  goodness.  Be- 
cause, on  your  principle,  the  agency  of  man  is  out 
of  the  question ;  for  your  doctrine  totally  destroys 
this  characteristic  of  man,  and  renders  him  incapa- 
ble of  acting  any  otherwise  than  irresistible  decrees 
dictate. 

14.  What  would  be  said  of  the  father  of  a  family, 
who  should  place  one  half  of  his  family  in  such  cir- 
cumstances, that  they  must  unavoidably  be  misera- 
'ble  all  the  days  of  their  lives  *,  and  then,  in  excuse 


60  LETTER  I. 

for  his  conduct  should  say,  "  I  have  done  thus  to 
seek  the  greatest  good  of  my  whole  family."  But 
had  you  not  property  enough  to  support  them  all 
comfortably  ?  a  Yes  ;  but  my  other  children  would 
not  have  beheld  my  particular  kindness  so  conspicu- 
ously, unless  I  had  also  manifested  my  indignation 
against  a  part  of  my  family."  Supposing  any  of 
these  poor  reprobated  children  should  presume  to 
complain  of  their  Jiard  fate,  and  it  should  be  said 
to  them,  u  Your  benevolent  father  is  just  and  good, 
you  must  not  complain,  nor  presume  to  question  his 
justice  or  goodness.  He  makes  you  miserable  that 
the  rest  of  your  brethren  may  be  more  happy — 
His  steady  i  fixed  purpose,'  is  to  '  seek  the  greatest 
good  of  his  whole  family.'  Your  kind  father  there- 
fore does  not  delight  in  your  misery,  although  he 
made  a  decree  before  you  were  born,  that  you  should 
never  obey  him,  and  that  your  present  misery  should 
be  a  consequence  of  that  disobedience,  which  you 
could  not  avoid.  To  obtain  an  end  so  benevolent 
as  the  '  greatest  sum  of  good'  to  his  whole  family, 
you  yourselves,  on  second  thoughts,  must  acknow- 
ledge is  worthy  of  so  holy  a  man  as  is  your  father, 
notwithstanding  the  apparent  defeatment  of  the  end, 
in  the  complete  misery  of  one  half  of  his  children. 
Moreover,  your  brethren  could  not  be  so  happy  as 
they  are,  unless  they  beheld  your  father's  displeas- 
ure in  your  confinement  in  torments."  Now  the 
only  difference  between  this  father,  and  your  deity 
is,  that  the  latter  has  unlimited  power  and  authority, 
and  therefore  can  and  will  inflict   everlasting  tof- 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  61 

merits  upon  the  reprobated  crew,  who,  according 
to  your  statement,  are  made  bad,  to  obtain  good, 
and  made  miserable,  to  obtain  happiness  for  the 
elect. 

15.  In  congruity  with  your  system  therefore,  you 
never  can  make  it  appear  that  God  seeks  or  obtains 
"  the  greatest  good  of  the  universe."  The  atone- 
ment you  admit  is  full  and  sufficient  for  all  the  hu- 
man race  ;  and  therefore  there  is  no  deficiency,  but 
goodness  to  give,  and  power  to  apply  the  merits  of 
Christ's  death,  in  order  to  make  all  eternally  hap- 
py. The  same  power  and  goodness  manifested  to 
the  reprobate,  which  you  say  is  exerted  towards 
the  elect,  would  as  effectually  change  their  hearts, 
and  make  them  holy  and  happy.  For,  according 
to  your  doctrine,  the  elect  are  totally  depraved,  "  up 
to  the  moment  of  regeneration,"  and  of  course 
they  take  no  active  part  in  their  conversion.  And 
the  reprobates  cannot  be  more  than  totally  deprav- 
ed ;  so  that  the  same  grace  and  power  which  was 
required  to  change  the  heart  of  the  elect,  would  also 
change  the  nature  of  the  reprobate.  It  therefore 
follows  that,  on  your  principle,  if  all  are  not  good 
and  happy,  it  is  either  because  God  cannot,  or  be- 
cause he  will  not  make  them  so  ;  and  either  suppo- 
sition impeaches  the  power  and  goodness  of  God, 
Your  summum  bormrn  argument  therefore,  respect- 
ing the  "  greatest  good  of  the  universe,"  deduced 
from  the  doctrine  of  foreordination,  is  fallacious. 

1G.  This  argument  cannot  be  justly  retorted  upon 
us,  because  the  scriptural  doctrine  which  we  plead 

F 


62  LETTER  I. 

for,  not  only  recognizes  the  power  and  grace  of  God 
in  the  conversion  of  sinners,  but  also  his  wisdom, 
justice,  and  holiness,  which  lead  him  to  treat  man- 
kind as  free,  moral  agents.  Men  are  in  a  state  of 
probation,  life  and  death  are  set  before  them,  and 
they  are  invited,  though  not  compelled,  to  choose 
life,  that  they  may  live.  We  do  not  believe  that 
God  foreordained  that  man  should  fall,  and  then  left 
him  to  himself,  and  to  the  subtilty  of  the  devil,  that 
the  decree  might  take  effect.  This  doctrine  we 
abhor,  because  it  contradicts  scripture,  violates 
reason,  is  contrary  to  common  sense,  and  above  all, 
reflects  the  greatest  dishonour  upon  the  resplendent 
attributes  of  Jehovah.  If  man  were  made  free,  to 
stand  or  fall,  in  his  pristine  state,  he  then  unneces- 
sarily brought  misery  upon  himself.  And  if,  after 
this,  God  has  provided  a  sovereign  remedy  for 
Adam  and  all  his  posterity,  which  a  part  of  them 
wilfully  reject,  it  is  just  and  good,  wise  and  holy, 
that  they  should  be  condemned  for  their  obstinate 
refusal.  In  this  "  scheme,"  we  see  that  the  great- 
est good  is  obtained  to  all  the  human  family  ;  be- 
cause such  is  the  wilful  and  rebellious  conduct  of 
sinners,  that  they  will  not  have  any  more.  But 
according  to  the  doctrine  of  eternal  decrees,  the 
elect  as  obstinately  refuse  the  offers  of  grace,  as  the 
reprobate,  until  they  are  overcome  by  omnipotent 
power ;  and  could  not  this  same  omnipotent  power, 
and  irresistible  grace  overcome  and  conquer  the  re- 
probate ?  On  your  principle  there  would  be  no 
more  justice,  goodness,  and   power,  in  one  case, 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  m 

than  in  the  other ;  for  your  doctrine  asserts,  The 
price  is  paid  for  all,  the  reprobate  and  the  elect — 
They  all  equally  refuse  to  accept  of  mercy,  until 
God,  by  an  act  of  sovereign  grace,  and  almighty 
power,  conquers  the  elect.  Can  you  assign  any 
satisfactory  reason,  upon  your  principle,  why  the 
reprobate  is  not  conquered  also  ?  You  say,  I  sup- 
pose, "  Yes,  because  God  has  determined  not  to  do 
so."  But  why  has  he  so  determined  ?  Do  you  an- 
swer, as  the  disputant  on  the  Hopkinsian  "  side" 
did  ?  because  he  would.  But  is  this  answer  sufficient 
to  satisfy  a  serious  inquirer,  who  wishes  to  know 
the  truth  ?  I  repeat  therefore  my  observation,  that, 
taking  your  notion  of  decrees  for  our  guide,  the 
;'  greatest  good  of  the  universe"  is  not  obtained. — 
The  end  therefore,  which  you  propose  to  your  sys- 
tem, being  defeated  by  the  system  itself,  it  is  on 
that  account  erroneous. 

17.  In  p.  20,  21,  you  say,  That  it  is  "  suitable" 
God  should  not  be  pleased  with  part  of  his  work, 
viewed  separately,  and  yet  is  "  infinitely  delighted 
with  his  system,  considered  as  a  complete  wholeS"* 
Do  not  all  the  parts  go  to  make  up  the  zvhole  ?  and 
are  not  all  the  parts  necessary  for  the  perfection  of 
the  whole  ?  Do  you  not  moreover  say,  that  every 
part  is  included  in  the  "  perfect  plan,"  and  all  ac- 
cording to  the  counsel  of  his  will  ?  Is  he  then  dis- 
pleased with  those  parts  which  are  necessary  to 
make  the  other  parts  perfect  and  complete  ?  What 
particular  part  of  his  si/stem  is  the  Almighty  dis- 
pleased with  ?  Not  with  sin,  surely.     For,  accord- 


U  LETTER  I. 

ing  to  Dr.  Hopkins,  whom,  it  seems,  you  do  not  like 
to  contradict,  sin  is  the  cause  of  the  greatest  good. 
And  certainly  you  cannot  suppose  that  he  is  dis- 
pleased with  that  which  is  the  cause  of  the  u  great- 
est good  of  the  universe."  If  he  be  not  displeased 
with  sin,  is  it  holiness  he  is  displeased  with  ?  It 
would  seem,  according  to  your  system,  that  he  is  not 
pleased  to  see  holiness  in  the  hearts  of  his  rational 
creatures  in  this  life,  for  you  plead  hard  for  the  ne- 
cessary continuance  of  "  indwelling  sin"  during  the 
term  of  life.  It  is  somewhat  curious  that  you  should 
assert,  that  all  the  parts  of  the  plan  of  Hopkinsian- 
ism  are  just  as  God  would  have  them,  perfectly  ac- 
cording to  the  counsel  of  his  will,  and  yet  that  there 
are  some  parts  with  which  he  is  not  pleased.  It 
would  seem  from,  what  you  have  said,  that  God 
cannot  satisfy  himself  with  his  own  works.  And 
why  not  ?  Because  he  lacks  wisdom  ?  or  power  ? 
But  the  building  you  have  described  was  never 
erected  by  the  divine  architect.  His  system  is 
perfect,  when  it  is  viewed  in  the  aggregate,  or  by 
parts,  all  being  according  to  his  mind  and  pleasure 
— and  therefore  he  saith,  My  counsel  shall  stand ; 
/  will  do  all  my  pleasure.  But  your  system  cannot 
hang  together,  because  the  different  parts  oppose 
each  other — they  cannot  harmoniously  unite,  be- 
cause it  was  never  designed,  nor  wrought  by  the 
Almighty,  all  of  whose  works  are  perfect.  It  car- 
ries too  distinctive  marks  of  human  weakness,  to  be 
of  eternal  origin,  or  of  eternal  duration.  Old  Cal- 
vinism, you  have  tried  to  patch  up  with  Hopkwmn* 


ON  FOREORDINATION.  C* 

ism,  but  it  is  like  putting  new  cloth  to  an  old  gar- 
ment, the  rent  is  only  made  worse. 

That  we  may  be  led  into  all  truth,  and  exhibit  in 
our  lives  a  practical  comment  upon  the  pure  and 
consistent  doctrines  of  Jesus  Christ,  is  Sir,  the  sin- 
cere prayer  of  your  obedient  servant  for  Christ's 
sake. 

N.  BANGS. 

Rev.  S.  Williston,  Durham,  „Y.  F. 

Rhincbeck,  March  30th,  181.5. 


f  :: 


LETTER  II. 


OS     TOTAL    DEPRAVITT. 


Rev*  Sir, 

JlF  your  u  foundation  work"  be  laid  in  the  sand  of 
error,  as  I  think  it  is,  the  superstructure  which  you 
have  erected  thereon,  may  be  removed  with  greater 
facility, 

1.  1 .  The  first  thing  noticeable  in  your  second 
sermon  is,  the  misstatement  of  the  question  which 
was  debated.  You  say,  p.  29,  "  It  was  the  second 
question  in  the  debate,  Whether  men,  in  their  natu- 
ral state,  previous  to  regeneration,  are  totally  sin- 
ful or  depraved."  This,  I  believe,  is  erroneous. — 
If  I  am  not  greatly  mistaken,  the  question  stood 
thus-    Is  man  totally  depraved  until  he  is  justified  ? 

2,  Although  I  might  object  to  the  word  total,  when 
applied  to  man  in  a  state  of  initial  salvation,  yet 
when  he  is  considered  abstract  from  all  the  provi- 
sions and  benefits  of  redemption,  none  hold  to  hu- 
man depravity  stronger  than  we  do.  And  if  men 
be  viewed  merely  in  a  state  of  nature,  or  "  in  their 
natural  state,"  as  you  have  expressed  it,  they  are 
unquestionably  totally  depraved.  But  this  is  not 
the  question  in  debate,  whether  men  are  totally 


68  LETTER  II. 

depraved  in  "  their  natural  state,  previous  to  re- 
generation j,s  but  whether  any  one,  previous  to  ac- 
tual sin,  may  be  considered  as  wholly  destitute  of 
the  benefits  of  redemption  ;  and  whether,  they  re- 
main totally  depraved  until  justified. 

Taking  the  negative  side  of  the  question,  I  plead 
that  there  is  a  quickening  power  of  divine  grace, 
by  which  the  sinner  is  awakened,  his  heart  soften- 
ed, and  by  which  he  is  brought  to  see  and  feel  the 
necessity  of  repentance  towards  God,  and  faith  to- 
wards our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  before  he  is  justified. 
Any  candid  person  therefore,  may  see  that  your 
manner  of  stating  the  question,  gives  the  reader  an 
erroneous  idea  of  the  controversy,  and  also  rep- 
resents our  doctrine  i  a  different  light  from  what  a 
fair  statement  would. 

If  you  should  say  it  makes  no  difference,  I  think 
the  following  remarks  will  convince  you  to  the  con- 
trary. You  affirm  the  public  debate  at  Durham 
was  mutually  agreed  upon  two  months  previous  to 
its  commencement.  Well  then,  says  Mr.  Benedict, 
the  length  of  time  from  such  agreement,  remained 
precisely  two  months,  until  it  actually  took  place. 
I  say  no  ;  the  time  when  the  agreement  was  made, 
was,  it  is  true,  two  months  previous  to  its  com- 
mencement ;  but  the  time  shortened  continually  un- 
til the  2nd  day  of  May,  1810.  You  say  man  is 
totally  depraved  previous  to  regeneration.  To  this 
1  agree,  if  men  be  viewed  merely  in  a  state  of  na- 
ture, and  totally  destitute  of  all  the  benefits  of 
Christ's  death  and  resurrection.    It  follows,  then. 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  GO 

says  Mr.  B.  he  is  totally  depraved  until  he  is  justi- 
fied. I  say  no,  for  there  are  many  visitations  of 
grace  previous  to  justification.  By  justification  is 
understood,  a  free  pardon  of  all  actual  sin,  and  a 
restoration  to  the  favour  of  God. 

If,  however,  you  contend  that  the  question  is,  as 
you  have  stated,  whether  or  not  man  be  totally  de- 
praved before  regeneration,  I  drop  the  above  dis- 
tinction, provided  you  receive  my  definition  of  the 
word  total  depravity.  Total  comes  from  totalis^ 
which  signifies  whole,  entire ;  and  of  course  totally, 
signifies,  as  saith  Johnson,  wholly, fully,  completely. 
Depravity,  according  to  the  same  lexicographer, 
signifies  a  vitiate d  state.  Accordingly,  to  be  totally 
depraved,  is  to  be  totally,  entirely  and  completely, 
vitiated  by  sin — that  is,  all  the  powers  of  soul  and 
body  are  fully  under  the  influence,  control  and  do- 
minion of  sin.  Consequently  the  understanding  is 
darkened,  the  will  perverted,  so  that  a  totally  de- 
praved sinner  has  no  understanding  of  the  ways  of 
God,  nor  no  desire  nor  inclination  to  do  his  will. 
This  I  grant  was  the  state  of  Adam  after  his  apos- 
tacy,  and  before  the  promise  of  a  Saviour  was  made. 
It  may,  for  aught  I  know,  be  the  state  of  infants  at 
the  moment  of  their  birth.  But  so  certain  as  Jesus 
Christ  bore  the  penalty  of  the  Adamic  law,  so  cer- 
tain it  is  that  all  are  born  into  the  world  under  the 
privileges  of  the  new  covenant  of  redemption  ;  and 
therefore  none  now,  are  in  the  same  state  that  Adam 
was,  previous  to  the  grand  promise  of  redemption. 
Take  the  following  illustration  of  this  subject.    Sup- 


70  LETTER  II. 

pose  a  politician  enumerating  the  high  privileges 
of  an  American  citizen.  He  contrasts  his  present 
state,  with  what  it  was  while  under  the  British  gov- 
ernment. To  make  us  the  more  sensible  of  our 
distinguished  blessings,  he  would  rehearse  the  many 
disadvantages  of  our  former  condition,  comparing 
them  with  our  present  advantages.  Such,  says  he, 
you  were,  but  so  and  so  you  are.  You  are  not  now 
what  you  once  were.  So  when  mankind  are  viewed 
in  their  relation  to  the  covenant  of  works,  under 
which  Adam  was  placed,  and  as  being  involved  with 
him  in  his  sin,  they  were,  according  to  their  then 
mode  of  existence,  participators  with  him  in  his  to- 
tally depraved  state.  But  in  consequence  of  the 
new  covenant  of  redemption,  which  comprehended 
all  mankind,  Adam,  and  all  his  posterity  were  eman- 
cipated from  the  peculiar  rigor  of  the  old  covenant, 
and  brought  under  the  gracious  dispensation  of 
grace.  Its  immunities  and  privileges  are  extended 
to  every  child  of  man.  The  true  light  every  where 
shines — grace  is  given.  And  none  are  totally,  en- 
tirely, and  completely  vitiated  by  sin,  but  those  who 
wilfully  sin  against  the  provisions  of  this  gracious 
covenant  until  they  are  given  over  to  a  hard  heart 
and  a  reprobate  mind. 

.  3.  We  are  willing  to  admit  the  definition  of  hu- 
man depravity,  which  you  have  given  in  page  31, 
that  it  "  means  the  sinful,  corrupt  nature  which  we 
bring  into  the  world  with  us  ;"  and  also  in  page  32, 
"  that  the  heart  is  wholly  and  continually  under  the 
power  of  sin."     We  fully  believe  that  all  which  is 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  71 

merely  natural,  is  sinful :  or,  in  other  words,  that 
there  is  no  moral  good  in  us  until  the  Lord  puts  it 
there  by  his  Spirit.  But  you  are  not  to  conclude 
that  this  is  a  point  conceded  by  us  to  the  Calvinists, 
for  it  is  a  doctrine  wc  never  denied.  Neither  are 
we  indebted  to  your  system  for  it ;  because  it  is 
found  in  the  scriptures, — and  no  men  ever  taught  it 
more  fully  and  scripturally,  and  advocated  it  more 
masterly,  than  those  eminent  and  evangelical  min- 
isters of  Christ,  Messrs.  John  Wesley  and  John 
Fletcher,  It  is  necessary  to  attend  to  this  remark, 
because  it  is  sometimes  the  case,  when  Calvinists 
hear  us  preach  this  doctrine,  and  other  doctrines  of 
the  gospel  connected  with  it,  to  say  we  preach  Cal- 
vinism. Those  who  Jo  this,  arrogate  to  themselves 
the  exclusive  privilege  of  revealing  and  advocating 
the  most  important  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  as  if  the 
church  never  knew  them,  until  they  made  them 
manifest. 

4.  The  point  in  debate  then  is,  not  whether  men 
are  totally  depraved,  when  they  come  into  the 
world,  and  while  destitute  of  all  the  benefits  of 
Christ,  but  whether  they  remain  so  until  they  are 
justified,  pardoned,  or  accepted  in  the  beloved ;  for  I 
understand  these  terms  synonimously.  I  also  take 
it  for  granted,  that  a  man  totally  depraved,  according 
to  your  definition  of  it  in  page  33,  has  no  grace,  no 
spiritual  light,  and  of  course  he  has  no  spiritual  dis- 
cernment, cannot  repent,  nor  believe  in  Christ. — 
And  you  contend  that  they  remain  so,  "  up  to  the 
moment  of  regeneration."  p.  39.     If  I  comprehend 


72  LETTER  II. 

your  meaning,  by  regeneration  you  mean,  the  same 
as  justification  or  pardon  of  sin.     Understanding 
the  term,  regeneration,  in  this   sense,  we,  on  the 
contrary,  maintain,  that  previous  to  justification  a 
sinner  is  enlightened,  convicted,  and  is  heartily  sor- 
ry for  sin.     St.  Paulsaith,  Eph.  iv.  13.  Whatsoever 
doth  make  manifest  is  light — and  Christ  said,  John 
iii.  1 9.   This  is  the  condemnation  that  light  is  come 
into  the  world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather  than 
light,  because  their  deeds  -were  evil.     And  in  verse  9, 
That  is  the  true  light  which  lighteth  every  man  thai 
Cometh  into  the  world.     Now  let  the  medium  of  light 
be  what  it  may,  whether  doctrine  preached,  read,  or 
the  invisible  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon  the 
mind,  it  is  evident  the  sinner  has  light,  before  he  is 
justified ;  unless  you  can  make  it  appear  that  all 
who  are  born  into  the  world  are  justified.     Indeed, 
if  I  understand  your  meaning  upon   this  subject, 
(which  I  confess  is  somewhat  difficult,)  you  make 
the  first  dawn  of  spiritual  light  upon  the  human 
heart,  to  be  regeneration  ;  or  the  first  act  of  divine 
grace  upon  the  soul,  regeneration.     This,  I  think, 
must  be  your  meaning,  because  you  make  repent- 
ance and  faith  subsequent  to  justification,  and  not 
antecedent  to  it,  p.  42.     This  being  the  case,  you 
are  reduced  to  the  necessity  of  admitting  that  all 
those  who  are  enlightened  by  the  Spirit  of  God, 
are  regenerated.* 

•  That  the  reader  may  be  convinced  I  do  not  misrepresent 
Mr.  Williston  in  regard  to  this  particular.  !  will  quote 
his  words  :— "  The  truth  is,  that  in  an  ur  sanctified  heart, 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  73 

And  St.  Paul  saith,  Titus  ii.  11.  For  the  grace  of 
God  ivhich  bringeth  salvation  hath  appeared  unto  all 
men;  v.  12.  Teaching  us  that  denying  ungodliness 
and  worldly  lusts,  zee  should  live  soberly,  righteously, 
and  godly  in  this  present  world.  Here  it  is  explicit- 
ly stated  that  the  grace  which  brings  salvation,  hath 
appeared  to  all  men  ;  and  that  it  is  the  grace  which 
teaches  us  to  deny  ungodliness,  &c.  Now  if  this 
saving  grace,  which  hath  appeared  unto  all  men, 
and  that  true  light  which  lighteth  every  man  that 
cometh  into  the  world,  in  its  first  operation  upon 
the  human  soul,  produces  regeneration,  it  follows 
by  fair  consequence,  that  all  are  regenerated.  But 
all  men  are  not  regenerated,  although,  according  to 
the  plainest  testimony  of  scripture,  all  are  enlight- 

tUere  is  not  the  least  degree  of  that  holy  love,  or  that  holy  re- 
pentance or  that  holy  faith,  or  any  other  holy  affection,  to 
which  the  most  holy  God  has  designed  to  make  the  promise  of 
Ills  favour,'*  p.  42.  If  I  rightly  comprehend  his  meaning  in 
this  passage,  he  means  to  say  that  the  promise  of  pardon  is 
not  made  to  any  unsanctified  person  ;  that  is,  in  plain  English, 
a  sinner  must  first  be  pardoned,  before  a  promise  of  pardon  is 
made  to  him!  If  he  had  said  that  a  promise  of  eternal  life  in 
the  world  to  come,  is  not  made  to  any  but  sanctified  Christians, 
he  would  have  spoken  scrip  turally  :  but  to  assert  that  the  fa- 
vour of  pardon  is  not  promised  to  any  but  those  who  are  sanc- 
tified, not  only  involves  the  contradiction  above  mentioned, 
but  is  expressly  contradictory  to  scripture,  Isa.  lv.  7.  "  Let 
the  wicked  forsake  his  way,  and  the  unrighteous  man  his 
thoughts;  and  let  him  return  unto  the  Lord,  and  he  will  have 
mercy  upon  him  ;  and  to  our  Cod,  for  he  will  abundantly  par* 
don.'1  In  these  words  the  promise  of  pardon  is  made  to  the 
wicked,  on  condition  of  their  returning  to  God. 

G 


74  LETTER  II. 

cned.  If  then  all  are  enlightened,  and  yet  all  are 
not  regenerated,  then  sinners  are  enlightened  before 
they  are  justified. 

5.  In  the  parable  respecting  the  sower,  recorded 
Luke  viii.  4 — 8.  it  is  said  of  some,  namely,  those  by 
Uie  way  side,  (v.  12.)  that  they  received  the  word 
(of  God,  v.  11.)  and  that  it  was  taken  out  of  their 
hearts.  Was  this  word  good  ?  You  dare  not  say 
no.  Well,  according  to  our  Saviour's  own  interpre- 
tation of  this  parable,  this  part  of  it  was  designed 
to  represent  those  persons  who  received  the  word 
of  God  into  their  hearts,  and  others  received  it  with 
joy,  ver.  13.  Were  those  persons  regenerated?  If 
you  say  yes,  then  you  acknowledge  the  possibility 
•f  falling  from  grace.  If  you  say  no,  you  give  up 
the  point  5  and  acknowledge  there  may  be  some 
good,  even  the  good  word  of  God  in  the  heart,  pre- 
vious to  regeneration. 

6.  So  also  the  parable  of  the  ten  virgins,  five  of 
whom  were  wise,  and  five  of  whom  were  foolish, 
Math.  xxv.  2 — 10.  When  at  midnight  it  was  pro- 
claimed, v.  6.  Behold  the  bridegroom  cometh,  go  ye 
out  to  meet  him,  it  is  added,  v.  7.  Then  all  those  vir- 
gins arose  and  trimmed  their  lamps,  v.  8.  And  the 
foolish  said  unto  the  wise,  give  us  of  your  oil,  for  our 

lamps  are  gone  out.  But  their  lamps  must  have  been 
lighted,  otherwise  they  could  not  have  been  extin- 
guished. 

Were  those  foolish  (improvident)  virgins  design- 
ed to  represent  the  justified  ?  I  think  not.  But  if 
they  were,  then  such  may  so  fall  from  grace  as  to 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  75 

be  shut  out  of  heaven,  v.  10.  If  they  were  not, 
then  sinners  may  have  light  before  they  are  justifi- 
ed. This  conclusion  you  may  attempt  to  evade,  by 
saying  a  man  may  have  light, and  yet  be  totally  de- 
praved. But  is  it  not  the  same,  to  say  a  man  is 
totally  sinful,  as  to  say  he  is  totally  dark?  You 
have  already  answered  this  question  in  the  affirma- 
tive ;  for  in  page  40,  you  say  regeneration  is  "  be- 
ing called  out  of  darkness  into  marvellous  light." 

7.  Once  more — In  Heb.  vi.  4.  it  is  said,  For  it  is 
impossible  for  those  who  were  once  enlightened,  &c. 
Do  you  suppose  these  words  describe  a  justified 
person  ?  I  do  not — although  I  believe  the  particu- 
lars mentioned  in  the  subsequent  part  of  the  verse, 
and  in  verse  5,  are  designed  to  characterize  a  re- 
generated man.  But  Calvinistic  writers  will  not 
allow  even  this.  If,  however,  a  person  is  enlighten- 
ed, and  not  justified,  then  a  person  is  enlightened 
previous  to  justification ;  and  therefore  a  person  is 
not  in  total  darkness,  nor,  consequently  totally  de- 
praved, until  he  is  justified. 

8.  Again,  Acts  xxvi.  18.  To  open  their  eyes,  and 
to  turn  them  from  darkness  to  light,  and  from  the 
power  of  Satan  to  God,  that  they  may  receive  for- 
giveness of  sins,  &c.  In  this  text  there  are  three 
particulars  mentioned  previous  to  their  receiving 
forgiveness  of  sins.  1.  Their  eyes  are  opened. — 
Here  is  one  remove,  or  "  degree"  from  total  blind- 
ness, or  total  depravity.  2.  To  turn  them  from 
darkness  to  light.  Here  is  a  second  romove,  or 
"degree?'  from  total  blindness,  a  remove  also  from 


.o  LETTER  II. 

darkness.  3.  From  the  power  of  Satan  to  God. — 
Here  is  a  third  remove  from  total  blindness,  a  re- 
move from  Satan  to  God.  And  4th.  The  end  for 
which  this  is  done,  that  they  may  receive  forgiveness 
of  sins.  But  sins  are  not  forgiven,  until  the  sinneF 
is  justified.  It  follows  therefore  that  the  sinner  has 
his  eyes  opened,  has  light,  and  is  delivered  from  the 
power  of-  Satan,  before  he  is  justified.  He  is  not 
then  totally  blind,  totally  dark,  and  totally  under  the 
power  of  Satan,  until  justified. 

9.  That  a  sinner  is  convicted  and  heartily  sorry 
for  sin  previous  to  justification,  is  abundantly  mani- 
fest from  scripture.  Isaiah  vi.  5.  Then  said  I,  Woe 
is  me  !  for  I  am  undone  ;  because  I  am  a  man  of  un- 
clean lips,  &c.  This  humiliating  confession  of  his 
sinfulness,  certainly  must  have  arisen,  from  a  pen- 
etrating sense  of  his  vileness.  And  that  it  preced- 
ed his  forgiveness,  or  justification,  is  manifest  from 
ver.  7,  where  he  says,  his  iniquity  was  taken  away, 
ithd  hu-  sins  purged.  So  also  when  the  prophet 
Nathan  had  convicted  David  of  his  sinful  conduct  in 
4  he  affair  of  Uriah,  David  said,  with  penitential  sor- 
row, I  have  sinned  against  the  Lord.  And  Nathan 
iaid  unto  David,  The  Lord  also  hath  put  away  thy 
sin,  2  Sam.  xii.  1 3.  If  this  confession  of  David  was. 
sincere,  it  was  also  hearty ;  and  it  arose  from  the 
conviction  of  truth  which  Nathan  addressed  to  his 
conscience  ;  and  the  confession  preceded  the  par- 
don. Notice  also  the  case  of  Sard  of  Tarsus,  re- 
corded Acts  ix.  He  was  first  convinced  by  a  light 
from  heaven,  ver.  3.     And  then,  Trembling  and  as- 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  77 

tonished,  said,  Lord,  what  wilt  thou  have  me  to  do  ? 
This  trembling  and  astonishment  arose  from  the  re- 
proving words  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  /  am  Jesus  whom 
thou  per  secutest.  But  all  this  while,  Paul  was  not 
justified,  as  is  evident  from  what  is  related  in  ver. 
17,  18 ;  where,  after  Ananias  delivered  his  message 
to  him,  it  is  said,  there  fell  from  his  eyes,  as  it  had 
been  scales  ;  and  he  received  sight  forthwith,  and 
arose,  and  was  baptized.  Those  persons  were,  no 
doubt,  exercised  by  tlmt  godly  sorrow,  which  worketk 
repentance  unto  salvation,  not  to  be  repented  of,  and 
which  always  precedes  the  witness  of  our  justifica- 
tion in  the  sight  of  God.  Now  if  a  godly  sorrow 
for  sin  worketh  repentance,  then  it  must  precede  re- 
pentance, and  repentance  precedes  justification. 

10.  That  a  sinner  must  repent  before  he  is  justi- 
fied, is  equally  evident  from  scripture.  It  was  the 
.doctrine  preached  by  John  the  Baptist,  Matt.  iii.  2. 
Repent  ye,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand.  It 
was  the  first  doctrine  preached  by  our  Lord,  when 
he  returned  from  his  successful  combat  with  satan 
in  the  wilderness,  Repent  ye,  and  believe  the  gospel, 
Mark.  i.  15.  It  was  also  the  first  thing  addressed 
to  the  people,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  Repent  ye, 
and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  Je- 
sus Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins,  Acts  ii.  38. — 
When  a  sinner  is  justified,  his  sins  are  forgiven.  But 
in  the  above  text,  the  apostle  Peter,  exhorts  them  to 
repent,  for,  or  in  order,  to  the  remission  of  sins.  So 
also  Acts  iii.  19,  Repent,  ye  therefore,  and  be  con- 
verted,  that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out,  &c.  In 
o  2 


78  LETTER  If. 

these  words,  repentance  is  pressed  upon  the  hear- 
ers from  the  same  consideration  as  in  the  former 
case,  namely,  That  their  sins  may  be  blotted  out, — 
And.  certainly,  justification,  which  supposes  an  ac- 
quital  from  guilt,  is  synonymous  with  blotting  out 
sins.  Inasmuch  therefore,  as  repentance  precedes 
the  blotting  out  of  sins,  a  sinner  must  repent  before 
he  is  justified.  Now  it  is  presumed  that  no  man 
will  repent  until  he  sees,  and  feels  its  necessity — 
and  a  sinner  cannot  see  its  necessity  until  enlight- 
ened by  the  Spirit  of  truth.  That  he  may  have  this 
sight  of  his  vileness  and  misery,  he  must  have  that 
light  which  makes  manifest  the  hidden  things  of 
darkness  ;  for  no  man  can  repent  without  divine 
aid,  as  Christ  saith,  without  me  ye  can  do  nothing. — 
And  inasmuch  as  a  sinner  repents  before  he  is  justi- 
fied, and  yet,  cannot  repent  without  divine  grace,  to 
n  prevent,"  to  quicken  and  influence  him,  it  follows, 
thai  he  has  a  measure  of  that  true  light  which  light- 
eth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world,  and  of 
that  grace  which  brings  salvation,  previous  to  justi- 
fication. But  a  man  totally  depraved,  has  no  such 
light,  nor  no  such  grace  ;  and  therefore,  he  is  not 
totally  gracelesss,  or  depraved,  until  justified. 

11.  If  you  alfirm,  as  some  have  done,  that  a  sin- 
ricr  can  repent  and  love  God  without  divine  grace  ; 
we  must  be  permitted,  until  evidence  is  produced  to 
support  it,  to  deny  such  an  unscriptural  and  unrea- 
sonable assertion.  Some,  perhaps,  have  been  led 
into  this  error,  from  confounding  the  foundation  of 
our  obligation  to  God,  with  the  means  of  fulfilling 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  79 

it.  The  foundation  of  our  obligation,  is  the  rela- 
tion in  which  we  stand  to  God  as  his  creatures — but 
he  never  can,  consistently  with  his  nature  as  a  just 
and  benevolent  being,  require  the  fulfilment  of  this 
obligation  without  affording  all  proper  assistance. 
Moreover,  it  is  utterly  impossible,  in  the  nature  of 
things,  to  require  us  to  see  without  light,  to  hear 
without  sound,  or  to  love  without  grace.  The  im- 
possibility arises  from  this  consideration,  that 
Christ,  the  true  light,  has  come,  the  Spirit  of  truth 
is  sent  into  the  world,  and  the  warning,  inviting 
voice  of  God  is  gone  forth  into  all  the  world.  This 
being  the  case,  you  might,  with  equal  propriety, 
say.  that  a  man  sees  under  the  meridian  sun,  with- 
out the  aid  of  its  enlightening  rays,  as  to  say,  that 
a  sinner,  under  the  blazing  light  of  the  gospel,  can 
have  spiritual  discernment  without  spiritual  light — 
and  you  might  also  as  well  assert,  that  a  man  can 
eat  and  be  satisfied  without  food,  as  to  say,  that  a 
sinner  can  love  God  without  the  love  of  God.  It  is 
true,  God  requires  every  man  to  love  him  with  all 
his  heart ;  and  this  requirement  is  just  and  good  ; 
but  a  sinner  can  never  comply  with  it  before  he  re- 
pents, and  he  cannot  repent,  nor  believe  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  without  grace.  The  grace  of 
repentance  and  faith  being  given,  and  being  used, 
on  our  part,  the  love  of  God  is  shed  abroad  in  the 
heart  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Then,  if  wc 
continue  to  walk  in  the  light  as  he  is  in  the  light, 
we  have  fellowship  one  with  another,  and  the  blood 
of  Jesus  Christ  his  Son,  cleanseth  us  from  all  sinr. 


80  LETTER  II. 

Now  the  obligation  to  love  God  with  all  the  heart  is 
fulfilled. 

12.  The  parable  of  the  prodigal  son  recorded 
Luke  xv.  is  both  a  proof  and  an  illustration  of  the 
subject  under  consideration,  i.  e.  that  a  sinner  is 
convinced  of  sin,  that  he  manifests  his  sorrow  by 
confession,  before  he  is  restored  to  divine  favour. 
In  the  first  place,  he  came  to  himself—here  was 
conviction,  after  a  long  night  of  insensibility.  2. 
He  remembered  the  wealth  and  benevolence  of  his 
Father.  Here  is  a  lively  representation  of  the  re- 
collection of  the  exuberant  goodness  of  God,  which 
the  sinner  had  abused.  3.  He  resolved  to  return 
with  this  humiliating  confession,  Father,  I  have  sin- 
ned against  heaven,  and  in  thy  sight.  This  is  the 
language  of  an  awakened  penitent  sinner,  exercised 
with  that  godly  sorrow,  which  worketh  repentance 
unto  salvation.  4.  Then  the  Father  is  represented 
as  beholding  him  while  yet  afar  off,  as  meeting  him, 
and  falling  upon  his  neck  and  kissing  him  ;  all 
which  is  emblematical  of  the  sense  of  reconciliation 
which  results  from  the  witness  of  pardoning  love. 
Now  I  ask,  is  not  a  sinner  better,  even  in  the  temper 
of  his  mind,  while  making  this  humble  confession 
of  sin,  and  while  returning  to  God  in  the  act  of  sin- 
cere repentance,  than  he  is,  while  wallowing  in  the 
swinish  pleasures  of  sensuality,  and  wandering  afar 
off  in,  the  strange  country  of  iniquity  ?  To  say  that 
all  this  is  subsequent  to  justification,  is  totally  to  sub- 
vert the  order  of  things.  It  is  assuming  a  ground 
utterly  untenable,  as  will  be  shown  in  the  sequel. — 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  H 

The  case  of  the  publican  is  also  directly  in  point.-— 
After  he  made  his  confession,  with  humble  contri- 
tion of  soul,  it  is  said,  He  went  down  to  his  house 
justified  rather  than  the  other*  What  makes  the 
marked  difference  between  this  man  and  the  phar- 
isec  ?  If  he  was  no  better,  while  in  the  penitent  pos- 
ture of  confession,  than  the  pharisee  while  he  exult- 
ed in  the  pride  of  his  own  righteousness,  why  is  he 
commended  by  the  Lord  Jesus,  on  this  very  ac* 
count  ?  Persons  in  this  penitent  state  are  unques- 
tionably in  a  more  hopeful  way,  than  those  who  arc 
hardening  themselves  in  iniquity. 

Neither  is  there  any  necessity  to  quiet  his  con- 
science, by  telling  him  to  rest  hern,  as  if  the  work 
of  his  salvation  were  done.  Indeed,  were  we  to 
teach,  that  regeneration  is  the  first  work  of  grace 
upon  the  soul,  and  that,  when  a  soul  is  once  justifi- 
ed, he  cannot  go  back  and  finally  perish,  there 
would  be  the  greatest  danger  of  deception  imagina- 
ble. Is  it  not  encouraging  to  a  penitent  sinner,  to 
be  informed  while  under  the  painful  exercise  of  re- 
pentance, and  struggling  against  the  strong  tide  of 
native  impurity,  that  these  are  sure  indications  of  a 
gracious  work  begun  in  his  heart ;  and  that,  if  he 
despair  not,  the  Lord  Jesus  will  appear  to  his  deliv- 
erance ?  It  is  true  it  is  all  of  grace.  It  being  from 
unmerited  favour  that  he  is  awakened,  and  enabled 
to  repent — and  this  grace  of  repentance  and  faith 
precedes  the  grace  of  justification,  as  much  as  dawn 
of  day  precedes  full  day-light.  There  is  first  the 
blade,  then  the  ear,  after  that  the  full  corn  in  the 


32  LETTER  II. 

ear,  Mark.  iv.  28.  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like 
unto  leaven,  which  a  woman  took  and  hid  in  three 
measures  of  meal,  till  the  whole  was  leavened, 
Matth.  xiii.  33.  Do  not  these  metaphorical  repre- 
sentations denote  a  gradual  work  upon  the  heart 
previous  to  justification  ?  If  so,  as  they  certainly  do, 
then  a  man  is  not  totally  depraved  until  justified. 

13.  But  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  is  required  in  or- 
der to  justification  ;  and  therefore  believing  mustpre- 
cede  justification.  Therefore  being  justified  by  faith) 
we  have  peace  with  God,  through  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  Rom.  v.  1 .  In  this  text  faith  is  considered 
the  (instrumental)  cause  of  our  justification,  and 
peace  the  effect.  Justification  itself  is  an  act  of 
God — It  is  God  that  justifieth.  And  is  it  not  im- 
possible in  the  nature  of  things  for  an  effect  to  pre* 
cede  its  cause  ?  Most  certainly.  It  follows  there* 
fore  that  believing  in  the  Lord  Jesus  with  an  heart 
unto  righteousness,  is  antecedent  to  regeneration.-— 
It  is  so  declared  to  be  in  the  most  explicit  manner, 
by  inspiration  itself.  After  that  ye  believed,  ye 
were  sealed  with  that  holy  Spirit  of  promise,  Eph. 
i.  13.  Here  the  seal  of  pardon  is  said  to  be  given 
after  believing.  Can  a  sinner  believe  to  the  salva- 
tion of  his  soul,  without  the  aid  of  divine  grace  ?  It 
is  certainly  impossible.  And  therefore  a  penitent 
sinner  has  grace  before  he  is  justified ;  and  conse- 
quently he  is  not  totally  sinful  until  justified. 

14.  If  you  still  contend  that  regeneration  is  ef- 
fected in  the  human  heart  previous  to  repentance 
dnd  faith,  then  you  must  take  the  following  conse- 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  63 

quences  along  with  you — That  a  sinner  is  justified 
in  impenitence  and  in  infidelity — and  then  you  have 
an  impenitent,  unbelieving  believer,  an  holy,  impeni- 
tent saint,  a  justified  unbeliever  !  Whereas  Christ 
saith,  He  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned.  If  a 
sinner  may  be  justified  in  unbelief,  he  may,  accord- 
ing to  that  declaration  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  be  in  a 
state  of  justification  arW  condemnation  at  the  same 
time,  i.  e.  he  may  be  justified,  and  not  justified  at 
the  same  time :  the  Lord  Jesus  also  saith,  Except 
ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish  ;  therefore  if  a 
sinner  is  justified  before  he  repents,  he  may  be  in 
danger  of  perishing  while  in  a  state  of  justification. 
Such  are  the  absurd  consequences  resulting  from 
your  unscriptural  notion  of  total  depravity.  More- 
over, if  regeneration  be  effected  by  the  first  act  of 
divine  grace  upon  his  heart,  he  is  no  more  a  free 
agent  in  the  work  of  his  regeneration,  than  he  was 
in  his  creation — and  therefore  the  objection  which 
you  state,  and  endeavour  to  obviate,  that  your  doc- 
trine annihilates  the  moral  agency  of  man,  and  con- 
sequently his  responsibility,  remains  in  all  its  force. 
Not  that  it  lies  against  the  doctrine  of  human  de- 
pravity scripturally  explained,  and  understood  ;  but 
against  your  notion  of  regeneration,  which  you 
think  originates  from  your  doctrine  of  total  de- 
pravity. 

We  freely  grant,  that  the  sinner  does  not  take  one 
step  towards  salvation,  until  divine  grace  moves  him 
thereto,  by  enlightening  his  understanding,  and  by 
influencing  his  will ;  but  we  also  contend,  that  after 


84  LETTER  11. 

his  understanding  is  thus  enlightened,  and  his  will 
influenced,  he  may,  and  often  does,  resist  its  opera- 
tions, agreeably  to  the  pointed  saying  of  Stephen  to 
the  stubborn  Jews, — Ye  do  always  resist  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  as  your  fathers  did,  so  do  ye.  From  the 
preceding  arguments  it  appears  plain,  that  a  sinner 
has  grace  to  enlighten  his  undemanding,  to  awaken 
him  to  a  sense  of  his  sinfulness,  to  work  in  him  a 
godly  sorrow  for  sin,  to  enable  him  to  repent  of  it, 
and  to  enable  him  to  believe  in  Jesus  Christ, 
before  he  is  justified — and  this  is  the  point  contend- 
ed for  in  the  debate. 

II.  1.  It  is  unnecessary  to  make  any  remarks 
upon  the  texts  of  scripture  you  have  quoted,  to 
prove  that  mankind  are  depraved  previous  to  regen- 
eration, because  this  is  a  truth  we  never  denied. 
And  as  to  their  proving  that  they  remain  so  until 
they  are  justified,  they  are  all  foreign  to  the  point. 
But  I  cannot  avoid  noticing  your  remarks  upon 
Rom.  v.  18,  page  42.  Even  so  by  the  righteousness 
of  one,  the  free  gift  is  come  upon  all  men  unto  justifi- 
cation of  life.  After  some  remarks  which  do  not 
touch  the  question  in  debate,  you  observe,  "  Per- 
haps all  men  in  this  verse,  means  all  those  of  whom 
the  apostle  had  spoken  in  the  preceding  verse, 
which  receive  abundance  of  grace,  and  of  the  gift  of 
righteousness,  who  shall  reign  in  life."  You  seem 
to  express  yourself,  as  though  you  were  doubtful  of 
your  own  interpretation.  And  indeed  how  any  man 
could  give  such  an  one  with  the  Bible  before  him, 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  85 

would  be  unaccountable,  did  we  not  know  the  pow- 
erful influence  of  prejudice.  To  favour  your  "per- 
haps" explanation,  you  have  left  out  the  counter 
part  of  the  text,  Therefore  as  by  the  offence  of  one 
judgment  came  upon  all  unto  condemnation. 

If  the  all  in  the  latter  clause  of  the  text  be  re- 
stricted to  those  who  receive  abundance  of  grace, 
then  the  all  in  the  former  clause  must  be  limited  to 
them  also.  By  this  absurd  interpretation  you  ex- 
empt the  reprobates  from  condemnation,  and  fix  it  on 
the  elect  only  ;  for  it  is  presumed  you  will  not  as- 
sert that  the  reprobates  have  received  abundance  of 
grace  and  of  the  gift  of  righteousness.  It  is  too  evi- 
dent to  be  successfully  controverted,  from  the 
reasoning  of  the  apostle  in  these  passages,  he  infer- 
red, that  the  free  gift  came  upon  just  so  many,  as  did 
the  condemnation.  If  then  all  were  condemned  in 
Adam,  all  were  justified  by  Christ.  You  are  mis- 
taken also  in  supposing  this  text  is  cited  to  dis- 
prove human  depravity,  according  to  the  explana- 
tion you  have  given  of  it,  and  which  we  admit, 
(viz.)  That  corrupt  nature  -which  we  bring  into  the 
world:  but  it  is  brought  to  prove  a  point  which  yon 
have  not  had  the  boldness  to  deny  in  your  book, 
namely,  that  infants  are  not  condemned  merely  on 
account  of  Adam's  sin,  but  that  they,  in  consequence 
of  the  obedience  of  Christ  unto  death,  are  justified— 
but  why  ?  because  they  are  born  into  the  world  ho- 
ly ?  No ;  but  because  Christ  has  freed  them  from 
*he  penalty  of  the  Adamic  law,  by   bearing  that 


80  LESSON  II. 

penalty  in  their  stead.  True,  they  inherit  a  cor- 
rupt and  depraved  nature  from  Adam;  but  this  is  not 
so  imputed  to  them,  as  to  constitute  them  guilty. 
and  condemnable.  According  to  your  doctrine, 
however,  the  infant  of  a  day  old  is  equally  involved 
in  guilt  and  condemnation,  with  the  sinner  an  hun- 
dred years  old.  This  horrid  idea  has  become  so 
odious  in  the  eye  of  justice  and  goodness,  and  so 
abhorrent  to  the  feelings  of  humanity,  that  you 
have  thought  proper  to  keep  it  out  of  sight  in 
your  crippled  defence  of  irrespective  decrees,  and 
your  unscriptural  doctrine  of  total  depravity. 

2.  You  go  on  :  "  But  this  would  not  disprove  the 
total  depravity  of  those  who  are  out  of  Christ." — 
This  is  a  very  vague  sentence.  From  it  your  read- 
ers might  infer,  that  we  undertook  to  prove,  that 
all  those  out  of  Christ,  even  devils,  and  those  sin- 
ners who  have  reprobated  themselves  by  a  long 
abuse  of  divine  grace,  are  not  totally  depraved. — 
Indeed,  the  principal  part  of  your  sermon  on  total 
depravity,  is  entirely  foreign  to  the  point.  For  we 
know  that  mankind  are  wicked  enough,  and  that 
their  depravity  is  sufficiently  manifest  in  their  deter- 
mined opposition  to  God.  But  it  is  also  certain  that 
their  quantum  of  depravity  is  accumulated  in  con- 
sequence of  their  wilful  abuse  of  the  mercies  of 
God. 

3.  You  seem  to  suppose  that,  because  regenera- 
tion is  a  radical  change,  a  sinner  must  remain  to- 
tally depraved,  "  up  to  the  moment  of  his  regene- 
ration."    And  yet  in  page  50,  you  admit  that,  "  by 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  &7 

awakening  and  conviction,  things  are  preparing  in 
divine  providence,  for   him  to  see  himself  entirely 
sinful  and    ill-deserving."     Pray  sir,   what  things 
are  preparing  ?  Is  the  Lord  now  only  preparing  the 
atonement,    or  the  work  of  redemption  ?    Is  it  the 
foundation  of  his  justification  which  is   now  adjust- 
ing ?  Or  is  it  the  illumination  of  the  Spirit  upon  his 
mind  ?  It  is  presumed  you  will  not  say  that  God  is 
now  laying  the  foundation,  for  other  foundation  can 
no  man  lay  than  that  which  is  (already)  laid.     As  to 
redemption  and  the  atonement,  the    first  you  think 
was  made  in  eternity  between  the  Father  and  Son  ; 
and  the  latter  you  will  not  deny  was  completed,  at 
least  before  the  day  of  Pentecost.     And  as  to  the 
illumination  of  the  Spirit  upon  the  heart,  so  far  as 
it  has  any  thing  to  do   with  the   point  in   debate, 
your  whole  sermon  is  an  unavailing  effort  to  prove 
there  is  no  such  thing,  previous  to  justification. — 
How  then,  conformably    to   your   sentiment,   can 
things  be  preparing  by    "  awakening  and  convic- 
tion" before  justification  ?     To  be  totally  depraved 
is  to  be  totally  blind ;  and  you  assert  that  a  sinner 
remains  in  this  melancholy  state  until  justified  ;  but 
here  you  assert  he  is  awakened"   to  see  himself  en- 
tirelv  sinful,"  &zc.  Can  a  man  totally  blind  see  him- 
self ?  The  blazing  light  of  truth  will  lead  you  some- 
times to  contradict  your  errors.  O  that  it  might  carry 
such  light  into  the  darkened  corners  of  your  babel 
of  confusion,   as  to  exhibit  its  native  deformity  to 
your  pious  soul.     For  it  is  possible,  I  believe,  for 
a  man  tq  have  some  piety,  although  surrounded  with 


33  LETTER  II. 

many  errors.  Do  not,  dear  sir,  think  me  too  char- 
itable— you  have  set  the  example.  For,  if  I  mis- 
take not,  you  think  a  man  may  be  as  pious  as  was 
the  apostle  Paul,  and  yet  be  totally  sinful.  The 
explanation  of  your  text  leads  me  to  this  conclusion. 
You  hold  he  was  regenerated  when  he  wrote  his 
admirable  epistle  to  the  Romans  ;  and  yet  you  think 
he  taught  the  doctrine  of  total  depravity  in  your 
text,  I  know  that  in  me,  (that  is,  in  my  flesh)  dwel- 
hth  no  good  thing,  Rom.  vii.  18.  This,  you  sup- 
pose he  spoke  of  himself,  as  his  then  present  state, 
and  therefore,  he  must  have  been  at  that  time  both 
totally  depraved,  and  regenerated  ! 

4.  Bui,  sir,  in  page  53,  you  make  a  more  explicit 
concession  in  favour  of  the  truth  contended  for  in 
these  sheets.  There  you  assert,  that,  "  A  k?wzc- 
hdge  of  this  (namely,  our  depravity)  is  forced  upon 
as  in  that  conviction  which  precedes  a  change  of 
heart."  I  have  put  the  words,  "  knowledge,'* 
4;  conviction,"  and  "  precedes"  in  italics,  that  the 
reader's  attention  might  be  arrested  in  its  progress, 
:o  note  the  pointed  manner  in  which  you  contradict 
yourself;  for  in  page  39,  you  assert  that  sinners 
remain  totally  depraved  even  up  to  the  moment  of 
their  regeneration  ;  yet  here  in  page  53,  you  affirm 
dial  a  knowledge  of  this  depravity  is  forced  upon 
lis  in  that  conviction  which  precedes  a  change  of 
heart.  Here  you  give  up  the  point  for  which  I  con- 
tend. It  is  not  however,  supposed  you  designed  to 
do  so.  But  a  ray  of  truth  providentially  intercepted 
the  mists  of  error,  which  your  heterogenious  system 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  89 

raised  about  your  soul,  and  your  pen  in  a  happy 
moment  recorded  it.  You  will  not,  I  think,  contend 
that  a  sinner  has  a  knowledge  of  himself,  has  a  con- 
viction of  his  depravity  and  sinfulness,  without  the 
illumination  of  the  word  or  Spirit  of  truth.  If  you 
do,  you  thereby  supercede  the  necessity  of  the  gos- 
pel word,  and  set  aside  also  the  necessity  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  which,  according  to  the  declaration  of 
the  Lord  Jesus,  is  sent  to  reprove,  or  convince  the 
world  of  sin,  of  righteousness,  and  judgment,  John 
xvi.  7,  13. 

5.  These  arguments  you  may  attempt  to  evade, 
by  saying  that  a  man  may  have  the  grace  of  convic- 
tion, and  of  self-knowledge,  and  yet  be  totally  de- 
praved. It  is  granted  that  a  man's  having  spiritual 
light  and  knowledge,  does  not  disprove  that  he  was 
totally  depraved,  nor  that  there  is  much  depravity 
yet  remaining  ;  but  it  undoubtedly  proves,  accord- 
ing to  your  own  definition  of  it,  that  he  is  not  totally 
so,  when  he  has  such  light  and  knowledge.  The 
apostle  Paul,  speaking  of  the  depraved  state  in  which 
the  Ephesians  formerly  were,  says,  Ye  ivere  some- 
times darkness.  If  then  a  man  can  be  totally  depra- 
ved, while  illuminated  by  the  Spirit  of  truth,  he  may 
then  be  in  total  darkness,  while  blessed  with  the 
light  of  truth,  i.  e.  in  total  darkness,  and  not  in  total 
darkness  at  the  same  time  !  A  man  totally  depraved 
is  totally  blind.  And  if  a  man  totally  blind,  can 
nevertheless  see  himself,  he  can  see  without  any- 
medium  of  vision,  i.  e.  he  can  see  and  not  see  at  the 
same  time,  which  is  a  contradiction!  By  admitting 
h  2 


JO  LETTER  II. 

therefore,  that  a  man  is  convicted  so  as  to  see  him- 
self, before  he  is  regenerated,  you  give  up  your  doc- 
trine, and  acknowledge  that  a  sinner  is  not  totally 
depraved  until  justified. 

G.  To  show  the  inconsistency  of  your  doctrine 
on  this  subject,  in  a  still  plainer  point  of  light,  I 
shall  examine  your  text,  in  connexion  with  your 
comment.  You  have  repeatedly  asserted,  and  in 
this  respect  we  agree  with  you,  that  the  new  birth 
is  a  "  radical  change  ;M  and  you  also  contend  that 
in  the  7th  of  Romans,  out  of  which  your  text  is 
chosen,  the  apostle  relates  his  then  present  experi- 
ence and  exercise  as  a  christian,  after  having  expe- 
rienced this  "  radical  change."  The  word  radical 
come  from  radix ,  root.  A  radical  change,  therefore, 
signifies  a  change  at  the  root,  heart,  or  seat  (accord- 
ing to  Dr.  Waits)  of  the  affections.  This  radical 
change,  therefore,  must  signify  a  thorough  renova- 
tion of  the  root,  or  heart  of  man.  What  do  vou 
mean  by  total  depravity  ?  Answer,  p.  32.  "  But  by 
total  depravity  is  meant  that  the  heart  is  wholly  and 
continually  under  the  power  of  sin — that  every  de- 
sire or  thought  of  the  heart  is  wrong — that  there  is 
no  hearty  obedience  rendered  to  the  law  of  God — 
that  the  heart  is  directly  the  reverse  of  what  it 
should  be."  This  doctrine  of  total  and  universal 
depravity  you  think  is  contained  in  your  text,  which 
Paul  applied  to  himself  in  his  converted  state. — 
What  was  Paul's  state  when  he  wrote  his  epistle  to 
the  Romans  ?  Answer,  p.  30,  "  Before  this,"  (be- 
fore he  wrote  this  epistle)  "  he  had  been  effectually 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  91 

called  Into  the  fellowship  of  the  gospel,  and  made  a 
partaker  of  the  divine  nature.""  This  we  fully  be- 
lieve ;  but  we  do  not  believe  that  in  the  7th  of  Ro- 
mans, he  designed  to  describe  the  experience  of  a 
christian  brought  into  the  liberties  of  God's  chil- 
dren ;  which  I  hope  will  appear  evident,  when  we 
come  to  consider  the  doctrine  of  christian  perfec- 
tion. But  after  making  this  assertion,  how  can  you 
consistently,  represent  him  as  affirming,  that  he  was 
at  the  same  time  totally  sinful !  Is  there  no  diiler- 
ence  between  the  "  fellowship  of  the  gospel,"  and 
having  the  "  divine  nature,"  and  the  being  "whol- 
ly and  continually  under  the  power  of  sin  ?"  Again, 
p.  30,  "  But  it  was  not  Btrictly,  and  in  every  sense. 
true,  that  Paul  had  no  good  thing  in  him,  at  the  time 
he  wrote  this  epistle."  How  then  can  you  suppose 
that  he  declared  himself  totally  depraved  in  your 
sense  of  the  word,  "  when  he  wrote  this  epistle." — 
If  he  had  some  "  good  thing"  in  him,  his  heart 
could  not  have  been  u  directly  the  reverse  of  what 
it  should  be."  Let  your  doctrine  therefore  be  true 
or  false,  it  is  not,  according  to  your  own  assertions, 
contained  in  your  text.  Understand  me  right — I 
do  not  deny  that  human  depravity  is  expressed 
in  the  text;  but  only,  according  to  your  view 
of  the  subject,  it  cannot  be ;  because  you  as- 
sert that  Paul  was  then  speaking  of  his  own  spirit- 
ual state,  as  an  experimental  christian.  According 
to  this  representation  of  the  subject,  Paul  was  a  to- 
tally depraved  christian  !  in  total  darkness,  although 
in  possession  of  the  light  of  the  gospel — having  his 


93  LETTER  If. 

heart  full  of  sin,  and  yet  enjoying,  at  least,  *  .some 
holiness."  For  as  strenuously  as  you  plead  for  in- 
dzvclling  sin  in  your  fourth  sermon,  you  are  con- 
strained to  acknowledge,  that  when  Paul  wrote  his 
epistle  to  the  Romans,  he  had  "  some  holiness." — 
"  But  by  total  depravity  is  meant  that  the  heart  is 
wholly  and  continually  under  the  power  of  sin." —  ' 
And  was  Paul's  heart  "wholly  and  continually  un- 
der the  power  of  sin,"  when  he  wrote  his  epistle  to 
the  Romans.  If  the  verse  you  have  chosen  for 
your  text,  expressed  his  then  present  state,  as  you 
suppose  it  did,  and  if  you  have  hit  the  genuine 
meaning  of  it,  he  certainly  was  continually  under 
the  power  of  sin,  not  only  at  that  time,  but  also  all 
the  days  of  his  life — and  yet,  if  we  may  credit  you 
in  another  place,  he  was  at  the  same  time  u  brought 
into  fellowship  of  the  gospel,"  and  had  the  "  di- 
vine nature."  Will  you  be  so  kind  as  to  inform  the 
world  in  what  part  of  Paul's  heart  the  "  divine  na- 
ture" was,  while  his  heart  was  wholly  and  continu- 
ally under  the  power  of  sin — how  much  "  holy  af- 
fection" he  had  while  his  heart  was  "  directly  the 
reverse  of  what  it  should  be," — how  much  hearty 
obedience  he  paid  to  God,  while  he  "  rendered  no 
hearty  obedience?"  When  you  have  fairly  solved 
these  difficulties,  and  reconciled  those  palpable 
contradictions,  you  will  convince  the  world  that 
Hopkinsianism  is  consistent  with  scripture  and  rea- 
son. Such  being  the  absurd  consequences  flowing 
from  your  ideas  of  total  depravity,  they  cannot  be 
founded  in  truth. 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  9-3 

7.  1  f  the  reader  wishes  to  know  our  ideas  upon 
depra  vity,  I  will  try  to  satisfy  him  in  a  few  words. 
We  believe  that  when  Adam  transgressed  ttr  law 
of  God,  he  thereby  lost,  not  only  the  image  of  God, 
m  which  he  was  created,  but  also  all  ability  to  obey 
and  love  God.  With  Mr.  Williston,  we  believe, 
apostate  Adam  begat  a  son  in  his  own  fallen,  de- 
praved likeness  ;  and  that  all  who  arc  born  into  the 
world  possess  nothing  morally  good  which  they  in- 
herited from  their  ancestors.  But  we  likewise  believe 
that  when  God  made  the  promise  of  a  Saviour  to 
Adam,  he  restored  to  him  spiritual  light,  with  power 
to  repent,  and  return  by  faith  in  the  promise,  to  his 
offended  Maker.  We  furthermore  believe,  that  on 
account  of  Jesus  Christ,  sufficient  light,  grace,  and 
ability  is  given  to  every  man,  at  some  period  of  his 
life,  to  enable  him  to  repent  and  believe  in  Jesus 
Christ,  (if  he  live  under  the  light  of  the  gospel)  to 
the  salvation  of  his  soul :  and  that  through  the 
atoning  merits  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  the  guilt  of 
Adam's  sin  is  not  so  imputed  to  his  posterity,  that 
any  of  them  shall  be  finally  and  eternally  misera- 
ble, merely  because  Adam  sinned.  Ye  shall  no  lon- 
ger use  this  proverb  in  Israel,  the  fathers  have  eaten 
sour  grapes,  and  the  children'' s  teeth  are  set  on  edge  ; 
hut  the  soul  that  sinncth,  it  shall  die.  When  the  cove- 
nant of  grace  is  taken  into  consideration,  and  man- 
kind are  viewed  in  relation  to  it,  we  conclude  none 
are  condemned  under  it,  but  those  who  sin  against 
its  provisions,  and  regulations.  But  infants  are 
net  capable  of  sinning  antecedent  to  all  knowledge 


04  LETTER  II. 

of  good  and  evil ;  and  therefore  they  are  not,  nor 
cannot  be,  consistently  with  justice  and  mercy,  con- 
demned on  account  of  Adam's  sin.*  Sinners  com- 
ing into  the  world  under  the  light  of  the  gospel,  liv- 
ing in  neglect  of  its  requirements,  and  thereby  har- 
dening their  hearts  against  the  convictions  of  truth 
and  love,  finally  become  so  totally  hard,  that  they 
are  beyond  the  reach  of  mercy.  Here  again  is  to- 
tal depravity.  Such  are  given  over  to  a  hard  heart 
and  a  reprobate  mind.  Having  filled  up  the  mea- 
sure of  their  iniquities,  they  are  justly  condemned  of 
God  ;  because  when  he  called  they  refused  to  an- 
swer. 

3.  Adam  being  the  representative  of  all  mankind, 
and  the  stamina  of  all  the  human  race,  all  were,  ac- 
cording to  their  then  mode  of  existence,  involved  in 
his  condemnation.  And  as  Christ  was  promised  to 
Adam,  who  was  our  representative,  all  wrho  were  then 
in  his  loins,  were  included  in  his  reprieve  and  justi- 
fication. All  are  born  into  the  world  under  the  dis- 
tinguished privileges  of  the  covenant  of  grace.  Not 
that  we  inherit  a  sanctified  nature  by  natural  genera- 

*  That  the  above  observations  give  an  impartial  view  of  our 
doctrine  on  this  subject,  will  be  seen  by  the  following  quotas 
tion  from  our  JJiccipline,  published  in  1 808.  p.  74.  "  We  believe, 
that  in  the  moment  Adam  fell,  he  had  no  freedom  of  will 
left;  but  that  God,  when,  of  his  own  free  grace,  he  gave  the 
promise  of  a  Saviour  to  him  and  his  posterity,  graciously  re- 
stored to  mankind  a  liberty  and  power  to  accept  of  proffered 
salvation.  And  in  all  this,  man's  boasting  is  excluded;  the 
whole  of  that  which  is  good  in  him,  even  from  the  first  mo- 
ment of  his  fall,  being  of  grace  and  not  of  nature," 


ON  TOTAL  DEPRAVITY.  96 

lion.  On  the  contrary,  this  nature  is  corrupt  and 
sinful ;  and  when  viewed  in  relation  to  the  Adamic 
law,  deserves  the  wrath  of  God ;  but  when  man  is 
viewed  in  relation  to  the  covenant  of  grace,  which 
was  ratified  by  Jesus  Christ,  we  see  how  those 
who  have  not  actually  sinned  may  be  justified  unto 
life,  and  being  sanctified  by  the  blood  of  the  cove- 
nant, are  qualified  for  eternal  glory.  This  ap- 
pears to  us  the  scriptural  representation  of  human 
depravity.  That  we  may  so  believe  in  Jesus 
Christ,  as  to  be  delivered  from  the  curse  of  the  law, 
and  be  justified  unto  life,  is,  dear  sir,  the  prayer 
of  yours,  &c. 

N.  BANGS. 

Rev.  S.  Williston,  Durham,  X.  F. 

Mintbccky  April  25th?  1815. 


LETTER  III. 


ON    ELECTION. 


■Rev,  Sir, 

!•  !•  vlN  entering  upon  the  doctrine  of  election, 
it  is  proper  to  notice  the  tendency  of  some  of  your 
remarks  upon  this  important  point.  Your  labour- 
ing -to  prove  that  election  is  not  founded  upon  works 
foreseen,  is  calculated  to  impress  the  reader  with 
an  idea  that  we  believe  it  is.  This  sentiment  you 
know  was  not  advocated  in  the  debate  ;  and  you 
also  know  that  the  "  disputant  on  the"  Hopkinsian 
{i  side,"  laboured  to  force  me  to  assert  and  defend 
the  doctrine,  that  election  to  eternal  life  depends  on 
our  works.  His  efforts,  however,  were  unavailing. 
So  far  from  believing  this  sentiment,  we  continually 
maintain  that  the  election  of  souls  to  eternal  life,  is 
predicated  of  the  goodness  of  God  ;  and  that,  if  it 
depended  wholly  upon  works,  no  one  would  see 
life.  It  was  pure  love  that  moved  God  to  give  his 
Son,  and  that  moved  the  Son  to  suffer  and  die  for 
man.  It  is  pure  love  that  moves  the  Holy  Trinity 
to  begin,  carry  on,  and  perfect  the  work  of  salva- 
tion in  the  hearts  of  sinners.  But  such  is  the  order 
of  God,  and  the  economy  of  grace,  that  this  work 
i 


98  LETTER  III. 

of  salvation  is  not  effected  without  the  co-Operation 
of  the  free  volitions  of  man.  Work  out  your  own 
salvation  -with  fear  and  trembling,  for  it  is  God  that 
worketh  in  you,  both  to  zvill  and  to  do  of  his  good 
pleasure.  Neither  are  we  justified  here  as  peni- 
tent sinners  by  works,  but  by  faith.  With  the  heart 
man  believeth  unto  righteousness.  He  that  believeth 
and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved.  Nor  does  it  follow 
by  consequence  from  our  doctrine,  that  election  to 
eternal  life  depends  upon  our  works  as  its  cause, 
ft  is  true,  we  believe,  from  the  undeviating  testimo- 
ny of  scripture,  that  by  the  evidence  of  our  good 
works,  which  are  the  fruits  of  justifying  faith,  we 
are  justified  in  the  sight  of  men  here,  and  in  the  sight 
of  God  at  the  great  day.  By  thy  words  thou  shalt 
be  justified,  and  by  thy  words  thou  shalt  be  condemn- 
ed. Was  not  Abraham  our  father  justified  by 
works  ?  Seest  thou  how  faith  wrought  together  7t-ith 
his  works,  and  by  works  faith  was  made  perfect, 

2.  In  order  to  shew  the  inconsistency  of  your 
scheme  of  election,  it  is  necessary  to  attend  to  the 
general  scope  and  design  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  in 
writing  his  epistle  to  the  Romans,  out  of  which  your 
text  is  taken.  From  a  careful  attention  to  the  whole 
epistle,  it  appears  to  me  to  have  been  the  principal 
design  of  the  Apostle  in  that  epistle,  to  prove,  1  • 
That  all  men,  Jews  and  Gentiles,  were  sinners,  and 
therefore  stood  in  need  of  forgiveness.  2,  To  con- 
vince them,  from  this  consideration,  of  the  necessity 
of  the  sacrifice  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  to  make  it  con- 
sistent with  the  character  of  God,  and  the  nature- 


ON  ELECTION.  99 

of  his  government,  to  pardon  such  sinners  as  were 
described.  3.  To  point  out  the  method  by  which 
the  benefits  of  Christ  are  applied,  namely,  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  through  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus.  4. 
To  exemplify  the  exercise  of  a  sinner  while  under 
a  legal  sentence  of  condemnation,  and  groaning  for 
deliverance.  This  he  illustrates  in  the  seventh 
chapter,  by  introducing  an  account  of  his  own  ex- 
perience, or  by  personating  any  man  under  the  ex- 
ercise of  repentance.  5.  To  exhibit  to  both  Jews 
and  Gentiles,  the  superlative  excellence  of  Chris- 
tianity, in  its  effects  upon  the  hearts  and  lives  of  be- 
lievers. 6.  His  next  principal  design  appears  to 
have  been  to  justify  the  ways  of  God  in  rejecting 
the  Jews,  and  in  receiving  the  Gentiles  to  be  heirs 
of  the  heavenly  inheritance.  To  this  the  Apostle 
anticipates  the  objections  which  a  thinking  Jew 
might  make  against  his  doctrine,  in  supposing  that? 
if  God  rejected  the  Jews  from  being  his  people,  he 
would  suffer  his  faithfulness  to  fail.  To  obviate 
such  objections,  the  Apostle  proceeds  to  shew  that 
God  as  a  sovereign,  elected  the  Jews  to  be  his  peo- 
ple, without  any  regard  to  their  worthiness  or  merit ; 
and  that,  inasmuch  as  they  had  long  abused  his 
clemency,  he  had  a  just  right  to  cast  them  away, 
as  a  punishment  for  their  many  crimes.  This  pro- 
position the  Apostle  proves,  and  illustrates  in  a  va- 
riety of  ways.  In  the  ninth  chapter  especially,  he 
introduces  the  matter  in  the  most  solemn  and  em- 
phatical  manner — In  a  manner  which  clearly  evin- 
ces the  ardour  of  his  mind,  and  the  burning  love  be 


J 00  LETTER  III. 

•felt  for  his  nation — In  a  manner  also,  which  mani- 
festly proves  he.  did  not  believe  in  your  doctrine  of 
decrees  and  unconditional  election.  V.  1.  /  say 
the  truth  in  Christ,  I  lie  not,  my  conscience  also 
bearing  me  witness  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  v.  2.  That  I 
have  great  heaviness  and  continual  sorrow  in  my 
heart,  V.  3.  For  I  could  wish  that  myself  w em  ac- 
cursed from  Christ,  for  my  brethren,  my  kinsmen  ac- 
cording to  the  flesh.  If  the  Apostle  had  been  about 
to  assert  your  doctrine,  he  never  would  have  ex- 
pressed himself  in  this  manner.  Can  it  be  suppo- 
sed that  he  felt  such  an  opposition  to  the  eternal  de- 
cree of  God,  respecting  the  reprobation  of  the  Jews, 
that  he  wished  himself  accursed  from  Christ,  if  he 
could  thereby  prevent  its  execution.  He  was  now  un- 
der the  influence  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  therefore 
spoke  as  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  if  the  rejec- 
tion of  the  Jews  at  the  present  time  were  an  effect 
of  an  eternal  and  irresistible  decree  of  God,  with- 
out any  regard  to  their  wickedness  foreseen,  would 
it  not  have  been  the  depth  of  duplicity  to  express 
such  an  anxious  concern  for  their  salvation  ?  Allow- 
ing their  reprobation  to  be  an  effect  of  their  volun- 
tary wickedness,*  of  their  malicious  hatred  to  the 
Lord  Jesus,  in  addition  to  all  their  other   crimes, 

*  If  their  wickedness  was  voluntary,  it  could  have  been 
<: voided ;  and  if  it  had  been  avoided,  the  conditional  decree 
of  reprobation  would  not  have  been  executed  upon  them.— 
The  condition  of  their  reprobation  was  their  various  and  ag- 
gravated crimes,  which  they  might  have  avoided  by  receiv- 
ing the  Lord  Jesus  as  their  Messiah,  and  by  acting  accord- 
ingly. 


ON  ELECTION.  101 

and  this  tender  concern  for  their  misery,  is  perfect- 
ly consistent  with  the  purest  spirit  of  piety.  You 
frequently  tell  the  people  that  opposition  to  the 
decrees,  is  indicative  of  impiety.  Do  you  think 
the  Apostle  was  so  totally  depraved  at  this  time 
also,  that  his  "  heart  was  directly  the  reverse  of 
what  it  ought  to  be,"  and  therefore  it  rose  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  decrees  ? 

3.  The  Apostle  proceeds  to  notice  the  sovereign- 
ty of  God,  in  his  choosing  Jacob  in  preference  to 
Esau.,  to  be  the  progenitor  of  Messiah,  of  whom  as 
concerning  the  flesh,  Christ  came,  zoho  is  over  all, 
God  blessed  for  ever  more,  verse  5.  "  For  this  is  the 
word  of  promise,  At  this  time  will  I  come,  and  Sa- 
rah shall  have  a  son,  verse  9.  And  not  only  this  ; 
but  when  Rebecca  also  had  conceived  by  one,  even 
by  our  father  Isaac,  verse  10.  (For  the  children 
being  not  yet  born,  neither  having  done  any  good 
or  evil,  that  the  purpose  of  God  according  to  elec- 
tion might  stand,  not  of  works"  [seeing  this  was  im- 
possible while  Jacob  was  yet  unborn]  "  but  of  him 
that  calieth)  verse  11.  It  was  said  unto  her,  the 
elder  shall  serve  the  younger,  verse  12.  As  it  is 
written,  Jacob  have  I  loved,  but  Esau  have  I  hated." 
The  text  which  you  have  chosen  as  a  motto  for  your 
second  sermon,  is  quoted  by  the  Apostle  from  Gen. 
xxv.  23.  and  stands  thus  :  Two  nations  are  in  thy 
womb,  and  two  manner  of  people  shall  be  separated 
from  thy  bowels  ;  and  the  one  people  shall  be  strong- 
er than  the  other  people  ;  and  the'  elder  shall  serve 
the  younger.  It  is  evident  beyond  contradiction, 
i  2 


102  LETTER  III. 

that  these  words  were  spoken,  not  of  Jacob  and 
Esau  in  their  individual  capacity,  but  of  their  pos- 
terity. Tzoo  manner  of  people  shall  be  separated 
from  thy  bowels,  which  plainly  refers  to  the  Israel- 
its  and  Edomites.  The  elder  shall  serve  the  younger. 
This  never  was  the  case  with  Jacob  and  Esau  as 
individuals.  Esau  never  served  Jacob  in  person  ; 
and  neither  did  his  posterity  until  the  days  of  David, 
when  the  Edomites,  who  were  the  descendants  of 
Esau,  were  brought  under  the  dominion  of  Israel, 
1  Kings  xi.  16. — 1  Chron.  xviii.  12. — 2  Sam.  viii. 
14.  The  election  therefore  spoken  of  here,  cannot 
be  personal  election  to  eternal  life,  which  is  insep- 
arably connected  with  personal  reprobation  to  eter- 
nal death.  It  was  necessary  that  some  one  should 
be  selected  from  the  human  family,  from  whom  the 
promised  Messiah  should  'escend  according  to  the 
flesh,  and  through  whom  the  records  of  the  grand 
promise,  and  the  revelations  of  God  should  be  pre- 
served. To  these  distinguished  privileges  the 
Apostle  asserts,  verse  4.  the  Israelites  were  elected. 
This  selection  depended  solely  on  the  sovereign 
pleasure  of  God ;  whose  perfect  knowledge  of  all 
persons,  cases  and  circumstances,  qualified  him  to 
make  the  wisest  choice.  He  no  doubt  saw,  that  Ja- 
cob and  his  posterity  were  the  fittest  persons  to  an- 
swer his  benevolent  design ;  and  therefore  made 
choice  of  him  and  his  descendants,  in  preference  to 
Esau  and  his  progeny.  All  this  can  be  admitted 
without  supposing  that  Jacob  and  his  posterity 
were  unconditioaally  elected  to  everlasting  life,  and 


ON  ELECTION.  103 

that  Esau  and  his  descendants  were  unconditionally- 
reprobated  to  everlasting  death.  If,  because  Jacob 
is  called  the  elect  of  God,  he  were  elected  to  eternal 
life,  without  any  regard  to  his  faith  and  obedience, 
it  will  follow  that  all  his  numerous  progeny  were 
also  elected,  for  they  are  uniformly  called  the  elect, 
the  people  of  God.  But  will  you  affirm  that  all  the 
Israelites  were  elected  to  eternal  life,  merely  be- 
cause they  are  denominated  the  elect  ?  To  be  con- 
sistent with  yourself,  you  should.  This,  however,, 
■would  be  running  upon  the  point  of  the  apostle's 
argument,  ver.  6.  For  they  are  not  all  Israel,  which 
are  of  Israel,  Although  they  were  exalted  to  pecu- 
liar privileges,  they  were  not  all  the  genuine  Israel 
of  God,  because  they  were  not  diligent  to  make 
their  eternal  election  sure, 

4.  You  think,  "  If  election  and  reproba'tion  ap- 
pear bad  when  applied  to  Jacob  and  Esau,  as  indi- 
viduals, they  must  appear  vastly  worse,  when  ap- 
plied to  them  as  the  heads  of  two  great  nations,"  p. 
56.  So  indeed  they  would,  if  we  admitted  your  no- 
tion of  unconditional  election  and  reprobation  to 
eternal  life  and  eternal  death.  But  when  it  is  con- 
sidered that  the  election  of  the  Israelites  to  certain 
external  privileges,  from  which  the  Edomites  were 
reprobated,  did  not  necessarily  affect  their  eternal 
interests,  all  that  apparent  badness  disappears,  and 
we  behold  an  illustrious  display  of  the  wisdom  and 
goodness  of  God.  But  you  suppose,  "  Esau  never 
had  any  piety,"  p.  56.  If  this  be  so,  how  could 
-the  apostle  .say,  By  faith  Isaac  blessed  Jacob  and 


104  LETTER  III. 

Esau,  concerning  things  to  come  ?  Heb.  xi.  20. — 
This  certainly  could  not  have  any  reference  to  the 
earthly  inheritance,  which  had  been  already  be- 
stowed on  Jacob  ;  and  for  this  blessing  Esau  sought 
carefully  with  tears,  but  could  not  obtain  it ;  neith- 
er could  it  refer  to  Canaan,  for  in  that  case  it  failed 
of  its  accomplishment. 

This  blessing  is  rernrrlod,  Gen.  xxvii.  39,  40* 
"  Thy  dwelling  shall  be  the  fatness  of  the  earth, 
and  of  the  dew  of  heaven  from  above  ;  and  by  thy 
sword  shalt  thou  live,  and  shalt  serve  thy  brother ; 
and  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when  thou  shalt  have  the 
dominion,  that  thou  shalt  break  his  yoke  from  off  thy 
neck."  The  reader  is  left  to  determine  for  himself 
respecting  the  import  of  this  paternal  blessing.  It 
seems,  however,  that  the  fatness  of  the  earth,  and 
the  dew  of  heaven  from  above,  which  appear  to  have 
been  pronounced  upon  Esau  in  person,  denote  two 
different  blessings,  from  the  earth,  and  from  heaven  ; 
thou  shalt  serve  thy  brother  $  this  could  not  apply 
to  him  personally,  because  he  never  served  Jacob  in 
person,  but  must  intend  the  future  service  of  his  de- 
scendants— thou  shalt  have  the  dominion,  must  refer 
to  some  time  yet  in  futurity.  It  does  not  appear 
therefore  that  Esau  was  laid  under  an  absolute 
curse  by  his  father ;  but  he  was  blessed  with  the 
fatness  of  the  earth,  and  with  the  dew  of  heaven,  in 
his  own  person. 

Let  any  man  of  candor,  impartially  examine  the 
two  characters  of  Jacob  and  Esau,  and  he  will  i.:A 
§s  much  to  applaud,  at  least,  in  Esau,  as  in  Jacob, 


ON  ELECTION.  105 

previous  to  the  conversion  of  the  latter,  which  ap- 
pears to  have  happened  on  his  way  to  Padan-aram* 
They  were  both,  it  is  true,  faulty  in  many  respects  ; 
and  if  there  be  any  difference,  Jacob  appears  most 
blameable.  From  a  view  of  their  personal  charac- 
ters, therefore,  we  can  find  nothing  to  justify  your 
chimerical  notion  of  Jacob's  unconditional  election 
to  eternal  life,  and  Esau's  reprobation  to  eternal 
death.  It  is  undeniably  manifest  that  the  election 
spoken  of  in  this  chapter  is  national,  and  therefore 
cannot  have  respect  to  the  eternal  states  of  men. 

5.  In  page  57,  you  advance  one  of  the  most 
shocking  ideas  which  can  enter  into  the  heart  of 
man  ;  That  God  determined,  before  either  of  the 
children  were  born,  without  any  respect  to  their 
moral  characters,  "  the  other  (Esau)tto  be  a  vessel 
of  wrath  fitted  to  destruction."  I  confess  when  I 
read  this  sentence,  my  mind  wa,s  filled  with  aston- 
ishment. I  was  ready  to  cry  out,  Good  Lord,  is 
this  thy  character  ?  It  cannot  be — it  is  utterly  im- 
possible for  the  God  of  love,  of  justice  and  good- 
ness, to  form  such  determination.  It  is  the  black- 
est impeachment  imaginable  of  his  holy  and  merciful 
character  !  If  an  earthly  parent  were  to  punish  his 
child  with  only  a  temporary  chastisement,  without 
assigning  any  other  reason,  than  because  he  would, 
without  having  even  the  good  of  the  child  in  view, 
he  would  be  justly  and  universally  abhorred.  To 
suppose  the  Almighty  should  bring  an  intelligent 
and  immortal  spirit  into  existence,  on  purpose  to  fit 
him  for  damnation,  is  to  represent  him  in  a  worse 


106  LETTER  III. 

point  of  light  than  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  caused  the 
three  Hebrew  children  to  pass  through  the  fire  to 
satisfy  his  revenge.  To  say  he  had  a  view  to  the 
general  good,  is  to  say  nothing  to  the  purpose.  I 
have  already  exposed  the  fallacy  of  this  argument. 
Your  assertion,  sir,  is  bold,  cruel,  and  unscriptural. 
It  is  bold,  because  unsupported  by  any  argument. 
It  is  cruel,  because  it  represents  the  Almighty  as 
acting  more  cruelly  than  Nero,  when  he  ordered  the 
city  of  Rome  fired,  that  he  might  have  a  pretext  to 
accuse  the  christians.  It  is  unscriptural,  for  the 
scriptures  assert  no  such  thing.*    To  what  has  been 

*  The  elder  shall  serve  the  younger,  "  This  passage,"  says 
Dodd,  "serves  for  a  key  to  explain  the  ninth  chapter  of  Ro- 
mans, where  the  words  are  quoted  ;  for  it  proves  to  a  demon- 
stration, that  tliis  cannot  be  meant  of  God's  arbitrary  predes- 
tination of  particular  persons  to  eternal  happiness  or  misery, 
without  any  regard  to.  their  merit  or  demerit ;  a  doctrine 
which  some  have  most  hnpiously  fathered  on  God,  who  is  the 
best  of  beings,  and  who  cannot  possibly  hate,"  [this  is  not 
strictly  true  in  every  sense,  though  what  follows  is]  "far  less 
absolutely  doom  to  eternal  misery,  any  creature  that  he  has 
made ;  but  that  it  means  only,  his  bestowing  greater  external 
favours,  or  if  you  please,  higher  opportunities  of  knowing  and 
doing  their  duty,  upon  some  men,  than  he  does  upon  others  ; 
and  that  merely  according  to  his  own  wise  purpose,  without 
any  regard  to  their  merits  or  demerits,  as  having  a  right  to 
confer  greater  or  smaller  degrees  of  perfection  on  whom  he 
pleases."  Thus  far  Dr  Dodd  ;  and  Dr  Clarke  adds  in  his  note 
on  the  place,  f*  The  doctrine  of  unconditional  predestination  to 
eternal  1  fe  and  eternal  death,  cannot  be  supported  by  the  ex- 
ample of  God's  dealings  with  Esau  and  Jacob;  or  with  the 
Edomites  and  Israelites.  After  long  reprobation,  the  Edom- 
ites  were  incorporated  among  the  Jews,  and  have  ever  since 
been  undi3tingui.sb.able  members  of  the  Jewish  church."    (See 


ON  ELECTION.  107 

said  respecting  Esau's  piety,  it  may  be  added,  That 
when  Jacob  returned  from  Padan-aram,  remember- 
ing, no  doubt,  his  unjust  conduct  towards  his  broth- 
er, in  the  case  of  defrauding  him  out  of  his  birth- 
right, and  also  in  lying  and  cheating  him  out  of  the 
paternal  blessing,  he  sent  presents  forward  to  ap- 
pease the  supposed  wrath  of  his  brother  Esau  ;  but 
after  meeting,  Jacob  said  unto  Esau,  /  have  s&en 
thy  face,  as  though  I  had  seen  the  face  of  God,  and 
thou  wast  pleased  with  me.  See  Gen.  xxxii  and 
xxxiii.  10.  Here  Jacob  acknowledged  the  superi- 
or dignity  and  goodness  of  Esau,  and  also  his  wil- 
lingness to  forgive  past  injuries.  At  this  time  Ja- 
cob's name  had  been  changed,  and  his  nature  renew- 
ed; so  that  he  no  longer  strove  to  supplant  his  bro- 
ther. We  have  no  authority  therefore  for  conclud- 
ing that  God  made  Esau  on  purpose  for  destruction. 
Were  we  to  allow,  that  he  was  wicked,  as  was  Cain, 
it  no  more  proves  that  this  was  the  ultimate  end  of 
his  existence,  than  it  does  that  God  can  lie.  This 
is  a  point  assumed,  on  the  supposition  that  your  doc- 

also  Newton  on  Prophecy.)  "The  Jews,  on  the  contrary,  the 
elect  of  God,  have  been  cast  off,  and  reprobated,  and  continue 
so  to  this  day.  If  a  time  should  ever  come  when  the  Jews 
shall  all  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  (which  is  a  general  opinion) 
then  the  Edomites,  which  are  now  absorbed  among  them, 
shall  also  become  the  elect.  And  now,  Isaac  finds  both  his 
children  within  the  pale  of  the  Jewish  church,  equally  entitled 
to  the  promise  of  salvation  by  Jesus  Christ,  of  whom  he  was 
the  most  impressive  and  the  most  illustrious  type.  See  Dr. 
A.  Clarke  on  Gen.  xxv.  23. 


108  LETTER  HI. 

trine  is  true,  which  can  never  be  substantiated,  so 
long  as  God  remains  just  and  good. 

6.  You  only  beat  the  air  in  your  first  section, 
where  you  say,  "  It  is  to  be  shown  that  election  is 
not  founded  on  works,"  p.  58.  Here  you  suppose 
that  our  doctrine,  either  by  principle  or  conse- 
quence, makes  election  to  eternal  life,  depend  solely 
on  our  works.  But  this  supposition  arises  from  a 
mistaken  apprehension  of  our  doctrine.  If  a  beg- 
gar were  to  receive  from  the  hand  of  a  wealthy  be- 
nevolent man,  something  to  supply  his  wants,  does 
it  follow  that  the  act  of  the  beggar  in  receiving  the 
gratuitous  donation  from  his  benefactor,  is  the  foun- 
dation, or  meritorious  cause  of  his  subsistence  ?  By 
.no  means.  The  benevolence  of  the  donor,  and  not 
the  act  of  the  beggar,  is  the  source  of  the  poor 
man's  subsistence.  Mankind  may  be  fitly  compar- 
ed to  beggars,  as  they  stand  related  to  God.  He 
offers  them  grace :  if  any  comply  with  the  condi- 
tion of  the  gospel,  and  receive  the  gift  of  pardon 
by  faith,  does  it  follow  that  their  act  of  receiving  is 
the  foundation  of  their  pardon  ?  It  does  not.  The 
source  of  all  the  favours  bestowed  on  fallen  men,  is 
in  the  plenitude  of  divine  goodness.  It  was  infin- 
ite condescension  in  God  that  caused  him  to  provide 
a  Saviour  for  sinners,  and  to  accommodate  the  terms 
of  acceptance  and  salvation  to  the  weakness  of  man. 
The  question  is  not  therefore,  as  your  readers  might 
infer,  whether  our  election  to  eternal  life  be  predica- 
ted of  works  or  grace;  but  whether  grace,  the 
grace  of  eternal  life,  be  unconditionally  bestowed 


ON  ELECTION.  100 

on  some,  and  whether  all  the  rest  be  unconditional- 
ly reprobated  to  eternal  death,  without  any  respect 
to  their  wicked  works.  All  the  scriptures  therefore 
which  you  have  quoted  to  prove  that  grace  is  the 
first  and  moving  cause  of  our  salvation,  makes 
nothing  against  us  ;  and  all  you  say  against  works 
being  the  foundation  of  our  election,  is  wide  of  the 
point,  as  we  never  held  they  were.  Nevertheless,! 
that  believing  in  the  Lord  Jesus,  is  the  condition  of 
our  justification  here,  as  penitent  sinners,  and  that 
those  good  works  which  spring  from  a  living,  justi- 
fying faith,  are  the  evidences  both  of  our  justifica-  * 
tion  here  and  hereafter,  is  abundantly  manifest  I 
from  scripture.  By  grace  are  ye  (not  shall  be)  sav- 
ed, through  faith,  and  that  not  of  yourselves  ;  it  is 
the  gift  of  God,  Eph.  ii.  8.  And  by  him,  all  that 
believe  are  justified  from  all  things,  Acts  xiii.  39. 
He  that  believeth  on  him  is  not  condemned ;  but  lie 
that  believeth  not  is  condemned  already,  because  he 
hath  not  believed  on  the  name  of  the  only  begotten 
Son  of  God,  John  iii.  18.  Who  that  reads  these 
scriptures  can  doubt  but  that  faith  in  Christ  is  a 
condition  on  the  performance  of  which  our  justifica- 
tion is  suspended  ?  Any  man  who  can  doubt  it, 
with  such  plain  and  positive  testimony  before  his 
eyes,  may  turn  sceptic  and  doubt  of  every  thing. 
If  this  be  so,  that  our  justification  is  suspended  on 
our  believing,  that  believing  is  the  expressed  con- 
dition of  justification,  then  your  doctrine  of  uncon- 
ditional election  to  eternal  life,  is  erroneous.  And 
if  this  part  of  your  system  be  erroneous,  so  also 

K 


110  LETTER  III. 

must  the  dreadful  counterpart  of  it'be,  namely,  un* 
Conditional  reprobation  to  eternal  death.  In  regard 
to  this  part  of  your  system,  I  believe  you  have  quo- 
ted no  scripture  to  support  it — and  you  are  quite 
excusable  ;  for  indeed  there  are  none  to  be  found. 
The  word  which  the  translators  of  our  bible  have 
rendered  reprobate,  is  a&w/xo;,  (adokimos)  and  this 
/comes  from  £oxi/aos,  (dokimos)  which  signifies  to  try, 
prove,  as  metals  are  tried  and  proved  in  the  fire. 
It  is  applied  figuratively  to  man — Previous  to  justi- 
fication all  men  are  a£oxt/uo?,  reprobates ;  that  is, 
«  such  as  will  not  bear  the  test,  when  their  charac- 
1  ters  are  examined  by  the  standard  of  Christianity. 
They  must  first  be  cast  into  the  refining  fire  of 
God's  Spirit,  until  the  dross  of  sin  be  separated 
from  them,  and  then  they  are  &x*/xo?,  elect,  or  ap- 
proved. This  word  occurs  but  eight  times  in  all 
the  New-Testament.  In  1  Cor.  ix.  27.  Paul  saith, 
Lest  that  by  any  means,  when  I  have  preached  to 
others,  I  myself  should  be  aSbx^to?,  a  cast-away,  or 
reprobate  ;  one  that  will  not  bear  the  test  of  exam- 
ination at  the  great  day ;  or  one  that  will  not  be 
approved  by  his  judge.  In  2  Cor.  xiii.  5,  6,  7.— 
Rom.  i.  28.-2  Tim.  iii.  8.  and  Tit.  i.  16.  it  is 
rendered  reprobate  ; — in  Heb.  vi.  8.  rejected.  Any 
person  who  will  consult  the  places  where  this  word 
occurs,  will  be  convinced  that  it  is  used  to  desig- 
nate a  person  whose  conduct  is  disapproved  in  the 
sight  of  God — Those  who  have  so  much  of  the  dress 
of  sin  about  them,  that,  when  weighed  in  the  scale 
o?  truth,  they  are  found  wanting.     But  the  &x»p» 


ON  ELECTION.  ill 

(dokimoi)  the  elect,  it  appears,  are  those  of  whom 
God  approves.  They  having  been  refined  in  the 
fire  of  God's  Spirit,  and  still  enduring  all  the  severe 
trials  which  come  upon  them,  are  found  pure  and 
good,  and  shall  be  found  unto  praise  and  glory,  if 
they  become  not,  by  departing  from  God,  repro- 
bates, or  cast  aways,  1  Cor.  ix.  27.  It  appears 
therefore,  that  the  reprobates  may  become  elect,  and 
the  elect  may  become  reprobates.  Here  is  no  foun- 
dation for  the  doctrine  of  eternal  and  unconditional 
election  and  reprobation.     See  Parkhurst, 

Allowing  the  accuracy  of  the  above  remarks, 
:hat  the  reprobates  are  such  as  are  disapproved,  af- 
ter being  tried,  how  can  they  be  reprobated  from 
all  eternity,  seeing  they  could  not  be  tried  before 
they  had  an  opportunity  of  acting  ?  Can  gold  be 
tried  before  it  exists  ?  To  say  that  God  knew  who 
would  stand  the  test  of  examination,  is  no  argument 
in  favour  of  Hopkinsianism.  This  declares  that 
God's  determination  respecting  the  final  estates  of 
men,  was  antecedent  to  his  knowledge  of  them ;  so 
that  prescience  itself  is  dependent  for  its  existence 
upon  preordination.     See  Letter  I.  p.  34,  35. 

God  saith  concerning  the  Israelites,  /  have  chos- 
en you  ia  the  furnace  of  affliction.  Were  they  in 
the  furnace  of  affliction  before  they  were  born  ?  If 
not,  this  choice  could  not  have  been  from  all  eter- 
nity. 

8.  In  Eph.  v.  6.  the  Apostle  Paul  assigns  a  rea- 
son why  impenitent  sinners  are  finally  damned. — 
"  Let  no  man  deceive  you  with  vain  words,  for  &• 


112  LETTER  III. 

cause  ofthtse  things  cometh  the  wrath  of  God  upon 
the  children  of  disobedience."  The  things  to  which 
the  Apostle  alludes,  are  mentioned  in  the  preceding 
verse — For  this  ye  know,  that  no  whoremonger,  nor 
unclean  person,  nor  covetous  man,  7cho  is  an  idolater, 
hath  any  inheritance  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ  and 
of  God.  How  different  the  opinion  of  this  Apostle 
from  yours !  "  It  is  not,"  say  you,  "  assigning  a 
sufficient  reason  for  their  reprobation,  to  say  they 
were  wicked,  and  would  not  accept,  of  mercy,"  p.  63. 
Now  sir,  either  you,  or  Jesus  Christ  and  the  Apos- 
tle Paul,  are  mistaken.  Paul  saith  in  the  above 
passage,  "  The  wrath  of  God  cometh  on  the  chil- 
dren of  disobedience,  because  of  their  wickedness." 
You  say,  "  This  is  not  a  sufficient  reason."  Paul 
saith,  2  Thess.  ii.  10,  11,  12.  That  sinners  are 
damned  because  they  received  not  the  love  of  the 
truth  that  they  might  be  saved — and  for  this  cause  God 
shall  send  them  strong  delusions,  that  they  should 
believe  a  lie,  that  they  all  might  be  damned  who 
believe  not  the  truth,  but  had  pleasure  in  unright- 
eousness. But  you  say,  this  is  not  a  sufficient  rea- 
son. If  the  Apostle  had  believed  your  doctrine, 
would  he  not  have  said,  they  are  damned  on  account 
of  an  eternal  decree  of  reprobation,  which  immuta- 
bly secured  their  wickedness,  that  they  might  be 
vessels  of  wrath  and  "  suitable  objects"  of  eternal 
indignation  ?  Jesus  Christ  said,  Luke  x.iii.  34.  How 
oft  would  I  have  gathered  you  together,  and  ye 
would  not  ?  Behold  your  house  is  left  unto  you  des- 
olate.    Ye  would  not  accept  of  mercy,  and  there- 


ON  ELECTION.  113 

fore  ye  shall  be  rejected,  i.  e.  reprobated.  You  re- 
ply, "  This  is  not  assigning  a  sufficient  reason  for 
their  reprobation."  Are  then  Dr.  Hopkins  and 
yourself  wiser  than  Jesus  Christ,  and  his  servant 
Paul !  Surely  this  is  being  wise  above  what  is  writ- 
ten. Were  I  to  quote  all  the  scriptures  which  as- 
sign the  wickedness  of  sinners,  and  their  refusal  to 
accept  of  mercy  as  the  cause  of  their  final  condem- 
nation, I  should  transcribe  a  great  part  of  the  bible. 
They  are  fitted,  it  is  true,  for  destruction  ;  but  they 
fit  themselves  by  abusing  the  goodness  of  God,  by 
an  obstinate  refusal  of  mercy ;  in  a  word,  by  not 
receiving  the  truth  that  they  might  be  saved. 

0.  Although  you  strongly  assert  your  belief  in 
unconditional  predestination,  you  seem  ashamed  of 
it  in  the  discussion  of  your  subject.     For  in  p.  59 
you  very  modestly  say,  "  But  why  did  the  Lord  of 
Angels  suffer  them  to  rebel  ?" — and  p.  60,  "  Why 
were  such  a  part  of  the  Angels  suffered  to  aposta- 
tize ?"     This  language,  sir,  ill  becomes  the   lips 
of  such  a  rigid  predestinarian  as  you  have  avowed 
yourself  to  be.     To  hold   that  God  absolutely  de- 
creed, before  the  foundation  of  the  world,  that  pre- 
cisely so  many  intelligent  beings  should  apostatize, 
and  that  every  particular  sin  of  their  lives  were  not 
only  unalterably  fixed  in  the  mind  of  God,  but  also 
"brought,  to  pass"  by  him:  and  then  talk  about 
suffering  their  apostacy,  is  truly  ridiculous.     Why 
not  speak  out,  and  ask,  Why  did  God  decree  and 
foreordain  that  Angels  should  rebel,  and  that  pre- 
cisely so  many  of  the  human  family  should  aposta- 
te 2 


114  LETTER  IIL 

tlze,  and  remain  in  their  apostacy,  and  finally  be 
damned.  And  why  not  give  a  categorical  answer 
to  these  questions,  in  conformity  to  your  unscriptu- 
ral  doctrine  ?  Because  he  would.  Does  the  absurd- 
ity of  your  doctrine  appear  so  glaringly  horrid  at 
some  times,  that  you  wish  to  draw  a  veil  over  it  ? 

10.  Page  64,  "  Paul  mentions  the  greatness  of 
his  sin,  as  one  reason  why  he  obtained  mercy." 
Is  this  correct?  He  is  so  far  from  assigning  the 
"  greatness  of  his  sin"  as  a  reason  why  he  obtained 
mercy,  that  he  says,  1  Tim.  i.  1 3.  But  I  obtained 
mercy  because  I  did  it  ignorantly  and  in  unbelief. 
These  words  seem  to  suppose,  that  if  he  had  believ- 
ed Christ  was  the  promised  Messiah,  and  if  he  had 
known  him  to  be  the  person  against  whom  he  acted 
so  violently,  he  should  not  have  obtained  mercy. 
He  says  indeed,  in  v.  14,  And  the  grace  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  was  exceeding  abundant  with  faith  and  love. 
And  in  v.  16,"  Howbeit,  for  this  cause  I  obtained 
mercy,  (not  because  he  had  been  a  great  sinner,  but 
because  of  the  abundance  of  the  grace  of  Jesus  Christ) 
that  in  me  first  Jesus  Christ  might  shew  forth  all 
long-suffering,  for  a  pattern  to  them  who  should 
hereafter  believe  in  him  to  life  everlasting."  The 
cmise  of  which  he  here  speaks,  is  not  that  he  had 
been  a  great  sinner,  (although  he  had  been  even  a 
blasphemer,  and  a  persecutor,  and  injurious,  v.  13.) 
but  that  Christ's  long-suffering  might  be  manifest, — 
and  that  the  Apostle  might  be  a  pattern  to  others, 
not  of"  indwelling  sin,"  but  of  faith  and  purity. — 
in  the  whole  passage,  I  cannot  discover  that  the 


ON  ELECTION.  11$ 

Apostle  had  the  remotest  allusion  to  sin,  as  a  reason 
why  he  obtained  mercy.  O  sir,  what  a  dangerous 
sentiment  you  have  advanced  !  Paul  obtained  mercy 
because  of  the  greatness  of  his  sin  :  Let  us  sin  then, 
may  all  blasphemers  say,  that  grace  may  abound. 
Do  not  say  that  this  objection  was  brought  against 
the  Apostle's  doctrine,  as  well  as  against  yours  ; 
and  therefore  you  teach  the  same  thing.  It  is  a  le- 
gitimate consequence  from  your  sentiment ;  but  was 
an  unjust  reflection  upon  the  Apostle.  Paul  ob- 
tained mercy  because  he  was  a  great  sinner.  "  Well 
then,"  says  a  correct  reasoner,  "  the  same  cause 
under  the  same  circumstances,  will  produce  the 
same  effect  ;  I  will  therefore  be  a  great  sinner,  that 
I  also  may  obtain  mercy.1'  Will  you  undertake  to 
prove  that  his  reasoning  is  not  conclusive  ? 

II.  1.  I  proceed  in  the  second  place  to  notice 
some  of  the  texts  of  scripture  which  you  have  cited, 
not  indeed  to  prove  unconditional  reprobation,  but 
your  doctrine  of  eternal  and  unconditional  election. 
"  All  that  the  Father  giveth  to  me  shall  come  to 
me,"  John  vi.  37.  All  were  given  to  Christ ;  for 
he  tasted  death  for  every  man,  Heb.  ii.  ix.  If  he 
tasted  death  for  all,  as  you  yourself  allow,  then  all 
were  given  to  him  ;  for  he  is  the  Saviour  of  all  men, 
specially  of  them  that  believe,  1  Tim.  iv.  10.  If 
therefore  you  insist  upon  the  words  in  the  absolute 
and  unlimited  sense,  universal  salvation  would  be 
the  result.  But  such  a  result  is  directly  repugnant 
to  scripture,  and  therefore  suck  interpretation  is  in- 


116  LETTER  III. 

admissible.  The  verb  giveth  being  in  the  present 
tense,  it  must  have  reference,  not  to  those  for  whom 
Christ  died  merely  ;  but  to  those  who  are  given  to 
him  as  his  people.  And  here  the  question  will 
arise,  Who  are  thus  given  to  Christ  ?  All  who  be- 
lieve on  him ;  for  said  he  to  the  Jews,  If  ye  believe 
not  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins,  John  viii. 
24.  The  obvious  meaning  is,  All  who  believe  on 
me,  inasmuch  as  they  do  the  work  of  God,  (John 
vi.  29.)  and  thereby  fulfil  the  condition  required, 
shall  come  to  me.  The  principal  hindering  cause, 
unbelief  being  removed,  I  will  draw  them  unto  me  ; 
so  that,  however  wicked  they  may  have  been,  /  will 
in  no  wise  cast  them  out.  Ye  have  not  chosen  me — 
Ye  did  not  select  me  as  the  Saviour  of  the  world — - 
but  I  have  chosen  you — selected  you,  who  have  for- 
saken all  to  follow  me,  from  the  mass  of  mankind, 
to  be  my  ambassadors  to  men,  having  ordained  you 
my  Apostles,  that  ye  might  bring  forth  the  fruit  of 
holiness,  in  your  lives,  and  in  the  success  of  your 
ministry  :  and  that  this  fruit  might  not  wither,  but 
remain  as  incontestible  evidences  of  your  faith  in 
me,  John  xv.  16. 

2.  As  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life  be  - 
lieved,  Acts  xiii.  48.  As  many  as  were  disposed, 
(so  is  the  French  rendering,  #•  tous  ceux  qui  etoient 
bien  disposes  pour  la  vie  Hernelle  crurent — and  all 
those  who  were  well  disposed  for  eternal  life,  believ- 
ed) by  the  preaching  of  the  Apostle  the  Sabbath 
previous,  to  eternal  life,  now,  under  his  preaching 
at  this  time,  believed.    If  the  Calvinistic  sense  of 


ON  ELECTION.  117 

this  passage  be  admitted,  we  must  take  the  follow- 
ing consequences  with  it — That  if  all  who  were  in- 
eluded  in  the  eternal  decree  of  God  for  eternal  life 
at  that  time  believed,  then  there  could  be  no  con- 
verts from  that  city  afterwards,  from  among  that, 
generation.  For  the  text  saith,  as  many  as  were  or- 
dained, &c.  It  will  also  follow  that  all  who  did  not 
believe,  such  as  the  blaspheming  Jews  mentioned 
in  verse  45,  were  ordained  to  eternal  death ;  and 
that  this  appointment  to  eternal  death  whs  the  only 
reason  why  they  did  not  believe.  This.  I  suppose, 
you  think  is  a  u  sufficient  reason."  However,  Paul 
assigns  a  different  one — he  tells  them,  verse  46, 
Seeing  yc  put  it  (the  word  of  God)  far  from  you, 
and  judge  yourselves  unworthy  of  eternal  life,  lo  we 
turn  to  the  Gentiles  ;  for  so  hath  the  Lord  command- 
ed us.  Here  then  for  once  it  seems,  Paul  acted  ac- 
cording to  the  command  of  God,  although  you  think 
the  decree  and  command  are  opposite.  Letting 
this,  however,  pass,  I  ask,  Is  it  not  more  scriptural 
and  rational,  and  more  congenial  to  the  dictates  of 
common  sense,  to  interpret  the  text  under  conside- 
ration in  congruity  with  those  texts  which  make  be- 
lieving a  condition  of  justification,  than  to  make  it 
speak  a  language  which  represents  the  Almighty 
as  absolutely  and  unconditionally  dooming  one  half 
of  his  creatures  to  everlasting  misery,  for  no  other 
reason  than  to  benefit  the  elect  ? 

3.  "  This  text  has  been  most  pitifully  misunder- 
stood. Many  suppose  that  it  simply  means,  that 
those  in  that  assembly  who  were  foreordained,  or 


113  LETTER  III. 

predestinated  by  God's  decree  to  eternal  life,  be- 
lieved, under  the  influence  of  that  decree.  Now, 
we  should  be  careful  to  examine  what  a  word  means 
before  we  attempt  to  fix  its  meaning.  Whatever 
muytxwl  (tetagmenoi)  may  mean,  which  is  the  word 
we  translate  ordained,  it  is  neither  ^wnruy^viot^  (i.  e. 
/ore-ordained,  /ore-appointed,  or  /ore-disposed) 
i;  nor  ffgoogioyxivo*"  (i.  e.  fo/ore-determined  ory*ore-or- 
dained)  "  which  the  Apostle  uses,  but  simply  tirayui- 
voi,  which  includes  no  idea  ofpre-ordination,  or  pre- 
destination of  any  kind.  And  if  it  even  did,  it 
would  be  rather  hazardous  to  say,  that  all  those  who 
believed  at  this  time  actually  persevered  unto  the  end, 
and  were  saved  unto  eternal  life.  But,  leaving  all 
these  precarious  matters,  what  does  the  word rtray- 
ft£ vos  mean  ?  The  verb  TaTrw  or  txo-j-u  signifies  to  place , 
set,  order,  appoint,  dispose  ;  hence  it  has  been  con- 
sidered here  as  implying  the  disposition,  or  readiness 
of  mind  of  several  persons  in  the  Congregation, 
such  as  the  religious  proselytes  mentioned  ver.  43, 
who  possessed  the  reverse  of  the  disposition  of  those 
Jews,  who  spoke  against  those  things,  contradicting 
and  blaspheming,  ver.  45.  Though  the  word  in 
this  place  has  been  variously  translated,  yet  of  all 
the  meanings  ever  put  on  it,  none  agrees  worse 
with  its  nature  and  known  signification,  than  that 
which  represents  it  as  intending  those  who  were 
predestinated  to  eternal  life  :  this  is  no  meaning  of 
the  term,  and  should  never  be  applied  to  it.  Let 
us  without  prejudice  consider  the  scope  of  the 
place :  the  Jews  contradicted  and  blasphemed,  the 


ON  ELECTION.  119 

religious  proselytes  heard  attentively,  and  received 
the  word  of  life ;  the  one  party  were  utterly  indis- 
posed, through  their  own  stubbornness,  to  receive 
the  gospel ;  the  others,  destitute  of  prejudice  and 
prepossession,  were  glad  to  hear,  that  in  the  order 
of  God,  the  Gentiles  were  included  in  the  covenant 
of  salvation,  through  Christ  Jesus  ;  they  therefore 
in  this  good  state  and  order  of  mind,  believed. — 
Those  who  seek  for  the  plain  meaning  of  the  word, 
may  find  it  here :  those  who  wish  to  make  out  a 
sense,  not  from  the  Greek  word,  its  use  among  the 
best  Greek  writers,  and  the  obvious  sense  of  the 
evangelist,  but  from  their  own  creed,  may  continue 
to  puzzle  themselves  and  others;  kindle  their  own 
fire,  compass  themselves  with  sparks,  and  walk  in  the 
light  of  their  own  fire,  and  of  the  sparks  which  they 
have  kindled  ;  and  in  consequence  lie  down  in  sorrow, 
having  bidden  adieu  to  the  true  meaning  of  a  pas- 
sage so  very  simple,  taken  in  its  connexion,  that  one 
must  wonder  how  it  ever  came  to  be  misunderstood 
and  misapplied."  See  Dr.  A.  Clarke  on  Acts  xiii. 
48. 

4.  You  also  quote  Rom.  viii.  29.  "  For  whom  he 
did  foreknow,  he  also  did  predestinate,  to  be  con- 
formed to  the  image  of  his  Son,  that  he  might  be 
the  first-born  among  many  brethren.  Moreover, 
whom  he  did  predestinate,  them  he  also  called ; 
and  whom  he  called,  them  he  also  justified  ;  and 
whom  he  justified,  them  he  also  glorified."  To 
understand  the  primary  meaning  of  the  Apostle  in 
this  passage,  it  is  necessary  to  call  to  .mind  his 


120  LETTER  III. 

principal  design  in  this  epistle,  which  was,  among 
others,  to  vindicate  the  conduct  of  God  in  casting 
away  the  Jewish  nation,  for  their  unbelief,  and  in 
receiving  the  believing  Gentiles  into  the  chiuxh. 
The  Jews  might  object,  that  if  God  indiscriminate- 
ly rejected  their  nation,  good  and  bad,  he  were 
both  unjust  and  unfaithful.  This  objection  was  in* 
troduced  in  the  third  chapter,  verse  5.  Further- 
more, the  calling  of  the  Gentiles  was  very  offen- 
sive to  the  Jews,  and  it  was  a  topic  all  along  in- 
sisted »jpon  by  the  Apostle  Paul.  The  Jews  con- 
sidered it  as  a  proof  of  the  mutability  of  God's  de- 
signs, to  reject  them,  and  adopt  the  Gentiles  for  his 
people.  To  this  objection  the  Apostle  opposes  his 
doctrine  of  election,  predicated  of  God's  prescience. 
God  knew  the  Jews  would  abuse  their  high  and 
distinguished  privileges,  that  they  would  reject  the 
Messiah,  and  according  to  this  foreknowledge,  he 
determined  to  reject  them.  He  also  knew  that  the 
Gentiles  would  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  there- 
fore he  determined  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world,  to  call  them  by  the  gospel,  and  give  them 
an  offer  of  salvation.  This  point  is  more  particu- 
larly insisted  upon,  Eph.  i.  4 — 13.  To  those  who 
should  say  that  God  was  unjust  and  unfaithful  in 
casting  away  the  Jews,  we  may  understand  the 
Apostle  saying,  no  ;  He  hath  not  cast  aruay  his  peo- 
ple whom  he  fortknew,  chap.  xi.  2.  Those  among 
the  Jews  whom  he  foreknew  would  embrace  the 
Lord  Jesus,  he  did  not  reject,  any  more  than  he 
did  the  believing  Gentiles ;  on  the  contrary,  he 


ON  ELECTION.  121 

predestinated  them  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of 
his  Son,  as  the  means  of  their  salvation.  It  was 
predicted  by  Matachi,  chap.  iv.  2.  that  those  among 
the  Jews,  who  feared  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jehovah 
when  Christ  should  come,  should  be  blessed  with 
the  rising  beams  of  the  Sun  of  righteousness  ;  and 
that  they  should  go  forth,  from  the  general  destruc- 
tion which  would  come  upon  the  nation  when  the 
wrath  of  God  should  burn  as  an  oven,  and  grow  up 
as  calves  of  the  stall.  Those  who  feared  the  name 
of  the  Lord  were  thus  appointed,  and  were  also 
called  by  the  preaching  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles. 
Go  not,  said  Christ  to  his  Apostles,  in  the  zvay  of 
the  Gentiles,  but  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel. — Give  them  the  first  call ;  gather  in  the  elec. 
from  among  them  first.  And  whom  he  thus  called, 
and  who  obeyed  the  call,  (for  many  arej^alled,  but 
few  chosen,  Matt.  xxii.  14.)  them  he  also  justified ; 
and  whom  he  thus  justified,  them  he  also  glorified. 
Those  who  are  called  by  the  gospel,  are  called  to 
come  into  the  church — The  glorification  therefore 
here  spoken  of,  I  conceive  to  be,  the  honour  con- 
ferred on  the  believing  Jews,  in  being  received  into 
the  church  of  Christ,  in  conjunction  with  the  Gen- 
tiles.*    Here  the  Apostle  shews  that  God  was  nei- 

When  we  read  of  glory,  our  minds  generally  ascend  to 
heaven,  as  if  there  were  no  other  way  to  be  glorifed,  but  by 
going  there.  But  this  is  evidently  a  mistake.  That  glory  fre- 
qucntly  signifies  the  privileges  of  the  church  militant,  is  man- 
ifest from  scripture.  Thus  Romans  ix.  4.  To  whom  pertaineth 
the  adoption,  and  glory,  and  the  covenants,  &c.     This  is  spok- 

L 


UZ  LETTER  III. 

ther  mutable,  nor  unfaithful  5  for  he  had  not  cast 
away  his  believing  people,  whom  he  foreknew 
among  the  Jews,  any  more  than  the  believing  Gen- 
tiles ;  and  that  this  conduct  of  the  Almighty  was 
perfectly  according  to  his  invariable  designs  of 
benevolence  towards  mankind :  and  also  that  this 
is  his  method  of  saving  men,  he  first  calls,  then  jus- 
tifies, and  then  glorifies. 

5.  But  if  this  interpretation  be  rejected,  and  you 
insist  that  the  text  must  be  understood  in  the  abso- 
lute sense,  then  you  must  take  the  following  conse- 
quences. Inasmuch  as  the  verbs  are  all  in  the  past 
tense,  whom  he  foreknew — he  did  predestinate — he 
called — he  justified — lie  glorified,  it  will  follow  that 

<m  in  reference  to  the  visible  symbol  of  the  divine  presence, 
the  shtkinph.     The  residence  of  God,  among  the  Israelites  in 
the  temple,  was  called  the  manifestation  of  his  glory.     "  Prpr 
perlygiajy  denotes  the  bright  rays  about  the  body  of  the  sun, 
by  which  the  sun  himself  and  all  other  objects  are  seen,  I  Cor. 
xv.  41."     Christ  is  called  the  sun  of  righteousness.     And  it  is 
in  the  Church  that  the  beams  of  his  glory  are  principally  be- 
held.    Those   therefore  who    are    the   true  members  of  his 
Church,  are  glorified ;  because  they  come  under  the  "  bright 
rays"  of  his  glory.     Peter  speaks  of  \\\e  glory  that  should  follow 
the  sufferings  of  Christ  1  Pet.  ill.     What  glory  could  this  be 
but  the  unfolding  of  the  wonderful  love  of  God  to  his  believ- 
ing people,  in  collecting  them  together  to  the  distinguished 
privileges  of  his  church.     Paul's  desire  was.  That  the  word  of 
God  might  have   free  course,   run  and  be  glorified.     As  God 
ina  peculiar  sense   manifests  his  presence  in  his   church,  so 
those  who  are  brought  into  it  may  be  said  to  he  glorified.     God 
acknowledges  them  as  his  peculiar  people. 

In  this  maimer  I  conceive  those  to  be  glorified,  spoken  of 
in  the  above  text. 


ON  ELECTION.  123 

all  whom  he  foreknew  as  his  people,  were  called  in, 
and  justified,  and  glorified  before  the  Apostle  wrote  ; 
for,  according  to  this  view  of  the  subject,  precisely 
as  many  as  he  forckneic,  (and  you  will  not  limit  his 
knowledge)  were  glorified.  In  this  case  you  must 
either  admit  that  the  elect  were  called,  justified,  and 
glorified  from  all  eternity,  which  is  impossible  ;  or 
that  all  the  elect  were  called  in  and  glorified  be- 
fore the  epistle  to  the  Romans  was  written.  But 
either  of  these  suppositions  involves  an  absurdity 
as  impossible  to  believe,  as  that  a  man  can  love  God, 
and  cannot  at  the  same  lime. 

C.  "Whatever  may  have  been  the  Apostle's  mean- 
ing in  the  passage  under  consideration,  it  is  entire- 
ly foreign  to  your  purpose.  You  utterly  deny  that 
election  is  founded  upon  God's  forcknowdedge ; 
whereas,  whatever  election  the  Apostle  had  in  view, 
it  is  certain  he  founded  it  upon  prescience.  This 
idea  is  totally  repugnant  to  your  doctrine,  which 
makes  prescience  itself  depend  upon  forcordination 
for  its  existence.  To  make  this  text  therefore  sup- 
port your  system,  you  must  prove  that  the  Greek 
word  ^o*yv»,  (proegno)  foreknoiv,  should  be  ti-an$- 
}^vd  fun  ordain.  But  this  you  can  no  more  do, 
than  you  can  prove  that  God's  counsel  includes 
every  other  counsel,  and  yet  that  there  are  many 
counsels  against  his  counsel.  h  is  submitted  to  the 
candid,  intelligent  reader,  whether  the  Apostle  in 
the  above  pas-age  be  not  tracing  the  order  in  which 
God  generally  saves  souls,  instead  of  describin^a 
regular  chain  of  causes  and  effects. 


124  LETTER  HI. 

7.  The  same  sentiment  is  inculcated  by  the 
Apostle  Peter,  1  Epistle  i.  2.  "  Elect  according  to 
the  foreknowledge  of  God  the  Father,  through 
sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  unto  obedience  and 
sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ. "  In  these 
words  the  Apostle  declares  the  election,  of  God's 
for  eknoid  edge,  not  of  his  foreordinat  ion — and  affirms 
that  the  medium  of  election  is  through  sanctification 
of  the  Spirit,  The  election  therefore,  of  which  the 
Apostle  speaks,  could  not  be  eternal  and  uncondi- 
tional, seeing  believers  could  not  have  been  sanc- 
tified in  eternity.  Neither  could  they  be  sprinkled 
with  the  blood  of  Christ  before  they  had  an  exist- 
ence. If  they  were  elected  through  the  medium  of 
sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  as  the  Apostle  asserts 
they  were,  their  election  was  in  time,  after  they 
were  born,  and  conditional,  when  they  received  the 
blood  of  sprinkling,  and  the  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit, 

8.  You  next  quote  from  Eph.  i.  4.  According  as 
lie  hath  chosen  us  in  him,  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world,  that  toe  should  be  holy  and  without  blame 
before  him  in  love.  It  should  be  particularly  noti- 
ced, that  this  was  an  address  to  the  whole  church 
at  Ephesus  ;  and  therefore  it  cannot  have  any  re- 
ference to  individual  election  to  eternal  life.  In 
this  beautiful  passage  of  scripture,  the  Apostle,  by 
i  figure  of  speech  called  prolepsis,  obviates  a  very 
common  objection  to  his  doctrine,  that  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  Gospel  dispensation,  on  the  ruins 
of  the  Jewish  church,  proved  a  change  in  the  de- 


ON  ELECTION.  125 

signs  of  God.  This  objection  arose  out  of  the  big- 
otry of  the  Jews,  and  their  violent  opposition  to  the 
peculiarities  of  Christianity.  To  cut  this  objec- 
tion asunder,  the  Apostle  reminds  his  Ephesian 
brethren,  of  God's  predetermination,  (v.  6.)  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world,  to  establish  the  Gos- 
pel dispensation,  and  to  call  the  Gentiles  into  the 
Christian  church,  together  with  those  Jews  who 
received  the  Messiah.  And  therefore  he  says, 
Having  predestinated  us  unto  the  adoption  of  chil- 
dren by  Jesus  Christ  to  himself  according  to  the 
good  pleasure  of  his  will.  From  the  first  verse  to 
the  tenth,  inclusive,  he  addresses  the  whole  body 
of  the  Christian  church  at  Ephesus,  who  were 
elected  to  the  exalted  privileges  of  the  Gospel  dis- 
pensation, according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  him  who 
:vorkcth  all  things  after  the  counsel  of  his  oxen  will; 
and  asserts  that  the  end  of  this  election  was,  that 
they  should  be  holy,  and  without  blame  (not  more 
and  more  "  guilty  and  ill-deserving."  as  you  inform 
your  elect  ones  in  Durham  they  are)  before  him  in 
love.  In  the  eleventh  verse,  he  seems  more  partic- 
ularly to  speak  of  himself  and  other  Jezuish  believ- 
ers— In  whom  also  we  have  obtained  an  inheritance, 
being  predestinated,  &c. — V.  12.  That  we  should  be 
(6  the  praise  of  his  glory  who  first  trusted  in 
Christ.  By  the  adverb  also,  and  the  words  first 
(rusted,  the  Apostle  contradistinguishes  the  Jewish 
converts  from  the  Gentile  believers :  then  in  verse 
13,  by  a  change  of  the  person,  it  is  evident  he  ad- 
dresses himself  more  immediately  to  the  Gentile  be- 
l  2 


m  LETTER  III. 

Uevers  at  Ephcsus — In  whom  ye  also  trusted,  af- 
ter that  ye  heard  the  word  of  truth  the  Gospel  of  your 
salvation.  From  all  which  it  manifestly  appears, 
that  the  Apostle  designed  to  vindicate  the  divine 
character  from  the  charge  of  mutability  and  injus- 
tice in  establishing  the  system  of  Christianty,  and 
calling  to  the  blessings  of  it,  the  Gentiles  ;  because, 
according  to  the  Apostle's  argument,  this  was  in 
conformity  to  the  benevolent  intention  of  the  Al- 
mighty before  the  foundation  of  the  world  ;  and 
therefore  this  part  of  his  conduct  was  no  impeach- 
ment of  his  veracity  to  the  Jews,  nor  no  new  and 
recent  design,  which  arose  from  disappointment  and 
mutability.  In  this  view  of  the  subject,  the  un- 
changeable goodness  of  God  towards  the  Gentile 
world,  shines  with  such  lustre  as  to  inspire  the  most 
unshaken  confidence  in  both  Jewish  and  Gentile  be- 
lievers. 

9.  To  suppose  the  Apostle  had  individual  and 
personal  election  in  view,  in  the  above  passage,  is 
\o  suppose  that  all  the  members  of  the  Ephesian 
church  were  unconditionally  elected  to  everlasting 
life.  In  this  case  what  becomes  of  your  doctrine 
of  the  certain  perseverance  of  all  the  elect  ?  In  at- 
tempting to  prove  which,  you  overthrow  your  doc- 
urine  of  election,  if  you  rest  its  support  on  such  pas^ 
Sages  as  the  above  ;  for  in  page  117  you  observe, 
4-  That  Christ's  church  is  made  up  of  two  sorts  of 
members,  who  possess  perfectly  opposite  charac- 
ters •,  yet  by  profession,  they  all  possess  one  char- 
acter."    This  is  undoubtedly  correct  5  and  ther*- 


ON  ELECTION.  127 

tore  when  the  members  of  the  visible  church  are 
stiled  elect,  chosen,  &c.  as  were  the  Ephesians, 
we  are  not  to  infer  that  they  were  from  eternity 
unconditionally  elected  to  everlasting  life.  Such 
an  inference  would  contradict  the  whole  tenor  of 
scripture,  as  well  as  invalidate  your  own  just  ob- 
servation above  quoted.  You  will  not,  1  presume, 
exempt  the  Ephesians  from  such  strictures,  for 
there  was  at  least  one,  who  had  stolen. 

10.  It  would  far  exceed  the  limits  of  these  letters, 
to  notice  all  the  scriptures  which  have  been  wrested 
from  their  primitive  design  to  support  error.  The 
ninth  chapter  of  Romans,  which  has  been  so  often 
appealed  to,  in  vindication  of  unconditional  pre- 
destination, is  a  sublime  and  able  vindication  of  the 
conduct  of  God  in  selecting  the  Israelites  to  be  the 
progenitors  of  the  Messiah,  and  the  repositories  of 
the  lively  oracles,  in  preference  to  the  Edomites. 
And  also  his  righteous  character  in  his  conduct  to- 
wards nations,  in  punishing  them  for  their  wicked- 
ness. This  is  exemplified  in  the  case  of  Pharaoh 
and  the  Egyptians,  and  was  now  awfully  illustra- 
ted in  the  rejection  of  the  Jews  for  their  unbelief. 
And  lest  any  one  should  impiously  charge  their  im- 
penitency  and  consequent  overthrow  on  God,  the 
Apostle  in  verse  32.  assigns  a  reason  why  they  did 
not  attain  to  the  law  of  righteousness.  Because  they 
sought  it  not  by  faith,  but  as  it  were  by  the  works  of 
the  law.  How  different  the  reason  mentioned  by 
Paul  for  their  punishment,  from  that  which  your 
doctrine  assigns.     Dr.  Hopkins  saith   expressly. 


128  LETTER  III. 

"  God  moves,  excites,  and  stirs  lip  men  to  do  that 
which  is  sinful ;  and  deceives,  blinds,  hardens,  and 
puts  sin  into  the  heart,  by  a  positive,  creative  in- 
fluence."* According  to  this,  God  is  the  moving 
and  exciting  cause  of  sin !  Nay,  he  is  the  immedi- 
ate author  of  it,  inasmuch  as  he  puts  it  into  the  heart, 
by  a  positive,  creative  influence!  O  Christianity! 
Thou  immaculate  offspring  of  the  Most  High,  how 
is  thy  chaste  character  traduced  by  such  unholy 
touches  of  Hopkinsian  theology  !  He  who  deceives, 
must  be  a  deceiver,  and  he  who  blinds  and  hardens 
people,  must  be  responsible  for  that  blindness  and 
hardness.  Such  glaring  absurdities,  and  manifest 
errors,  need  not  a  formal  confutation.  They  can- 
not only  error  and  falsehood,  but  blasphemy  upon 
the  very  face  of  them.  To  mention  them  is  suffi- 
cient to  confute  them.  There  is  no  necessity  there- 
fore for  us  to  reject  the  ninth  of  Romans  "  as  rigid 
predestinarianism,"  nor  to  say,  "  It  is  blasphemous, 
and  not  fit  to  be  read."  p.  55.  On  the  contrary, 
we  would  recommend  that  chapter,  with  the  tenth 
and  eleventh  as  a  masterly  vindication  of  the  right- 
eous conduct  of  God  towards  these  nations,  who, 
by  a  long  abuse  of  his  exuberant  goodness,  have 
fitted  themselves  for  destruction.  It  is  also  calcula- 
ted to  silence  the  unjust  complaints  of  those,  who 
are  discontented  with  their  externalprivileges  ;  and 
to  warn  those  who  have  received ^/foe  talents,  or  one 
talent,  against  the  abuse  of  them.     The  eleventh 

•  Contrast,  p.  $3. 


ON  ELECTION.  129 

Chapter  ought  to  be  read  by  all  Christians,  and  es- 
pecially the  lukewarm,  For  if  God  spared  not  the 
natural  branches (the  Jews)  take  heed  lest  he  spare 
not  thee  (Gentile).  Behold  the  goodness  and  sever- 
ity of  God  :  On  them  which  fell,  severity;  but  toward, 
thee)  good?iess,  if  thou  continue  in  his  goodness  ;  other- 
zcise  thou  also  shalt  be  cut  off.  The  election  therefore, 
so  far  from  being  unconditional,  is  guaranteed  to 
believers  on  the  express  condition  of  their  continu- 
ing in  his  goodness.  It  is  true,  your  inconsequent 
inferences  from  the  ninth  chapter,  savours  too  much 
of  "  rigid  prcdestinarianism,"  and  is  too  i;  blas- 
phemous" to  be  fathered  on  God.  It  is  well,  how- 
ever, for  the  character  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  and  for 
the  character  of  the  sovereign  whose  ambassador  he 
was,  that  your  comment  is  the  comment  of  a  fallible 
man,  in  which  implicit  faith  is  not  required.  Al- 
though you  cannot  have  "  the  least  mite  of  charity" 
for  the  man  who  thinks  the  blood  of  Christ  has 
cleansed  his  heart  from  all  sin,  I  hope  the  time 
will  never  come,  when  men  shall  think  they  do  God 
service  in  burning  these  poor  deluded  reprobates, 
because  they  cannot  believe  God  from  all  eternity 
doomed  myriads  of  intelligent  beings  to  hell,  mere- 
ly because  he  would.  If  any,  however,  should 
feel  a  disposition  to  do  so,  they  might  think  that, 
inasmuch  as  -'-  all  sins  are  included  in  God's  perfect 
plan,"  and  also  have  a  tendency  to  '-'  promote  the 
greatest  good  of  the  universe,"  it  would  be  perfect- 
ly right  to  exert  it  in  exterminating  such  "  sinless 
monsters."     How  easy?   upon  your   principle,  for 


130  LETTER  HI. 

men  to  persuade  themselves,  that  it  would  be  for 
the  greatest  good  of  the  universe,  to  rid  the  earth 
of  such  deluded  heretics,  such  "  ministers  of  Satan,' ' 
who  go  about  to  deceive  and  devour  the  elect,  who 
were  secured  by  an  unchangeable  decree  of  God, 
before  the  world  was  made  !  You  seem  wonderfully 
concerned  for  fear  these  ministers  of  Satan,  as  you 
indirectly  insinuate  Methodist  Preachers  are,  should 
destroy  some  of  the  eternally  elected  ones.  Did 
your  faith  stagger  in  an  unguarded  moment  ?  Or  did 
you  think  our  "  malicious  hatred"  to  God  so  in- 
veterate, and  that  we  were  so  omnipotently  strong, 
that  we  could  reverse  the  eternal  decrees  of  God, 
and  rob  Christ  of  those  whom  he  had  bound  by  a 
chain  of  eternal  decrees  !  Make  yourself  perfectly 
easy;  sir ;  we  will  be  content  if  we  can  save  some 
of  your  imaginary  reprobates,  which  you  erroneous- 
ly and  unbelievingly  consign  to  eternal  torments 
before  they  were  born.  We  will  strive  not  to  hurt 
the  oil  and  the  wine,  the  precious  elect.  But  if  after 
all,  we  should  find  ourselves  mistaken,  your  system 
proving  true,  we  shall  have  the  consolation  to  re- 
flect that  we  fulfilled  the  decree,  and  consequently 
the  will  of  God.  And  in  this  case,  I  know  not 
which  will  be  most  happy,  the  deceived  reprobate, 
or  the  undeceived  elect.  Both  did  the  will  of  God, 
one  precisely  as  much  as  the  other  ;  only  with  this 
difference,  our  labour  was  the  hardest,  and  most 
commendable,  because  without  it  the  "  greatest 
good  of  the  universe"  could  not  have  been  obtain- 
ed :  and  certainly  there  must"  be  much,  very  much 


ON  ELECTION.  idl 

merit  in  tho»e  ;;  wicked  deeds"  which  secured  the 
greatest  possible  good  to  the  universe  !  The  hearts 
of  the  reprobates  will  be  so  elated  at  the  recollec- 
tion of  having  been  the  wicked  instruments  of  so 
much  good,  that  hell  itself  will  be  turned  to  heav- 
en ;  and  instead  of  gnawing  their  tongues  for  pain, 
they  will  sing  the  praises  of  sin  to  all  eternity  ! 

11.  No  man  in  the  world  can  shew  that  this  con- 
sequence does    not    flow  from  your  doctrine  ;  for 
you  assert  that  just  so  much  sin  is  ordained  as  is 
for  the  greatest  good  of  the  universe.     If  so,  the 
greatest  good  could  not  be  realized  without  it.    And 
most  certainly,  that  which  is  the  cause  of  the  great- 
est good,  must  have  the  greatest  merit.     O  happy 
sinners,  who  are  the  cause  of  so  much  good !    Is 
not  this  deifying  sin?  That  which  is  the  cause  of 
the  greatest  good,  must  be    the  greatest  and  best 
being.     But  according  to  your  system,  sin   is  the 
cause  of  the  greatest  good.     If  therefore  you  would 
be  consistent  in  practice  and  principle,  you  ought 
no  longer  to  preach  against  sin,  lest  you  should  be 
found  to  fight  against  God.     But  you  have  a  reply 
at  hand :  you  will,  perhaps,  say,  God  is  the  efficient 
cause  of  sin  ;  and  therefore    God   is  the  cause  of 
good,  and  not  sin.   But  do  you  not  frequently  assert, 
that  sin  was  ordained  because  the  greatest  good  of 
the  universe  required  it  ?  This  dernier  resort  there- 
fore, docs  not  help  you  any.     God  is  the  cause  of 
sin — sin  is  the  cause  of  the  greatest  good — A  good 
cause  will  produce  a  good  effect,  and  a  bad  cause  a 
bad  effect.    Which   sword  will  you  choose  ?  If  the 


132  LETTER  III. 

first,  you  make  sin  good.  Will  this  do  ?  If  the  se^ 
cond,  if  you  assert  sin  is  bad,  and  also  say  God  is 
its  cause,  you  make  God  unholy.  Will  you  then 
cling  to  a  system  which  makes  you  call  evil,  good, 
and  good,  evil  ?  Which  makes  either  sin — good,  or 
otherwise  God,  unholy* 

III.  In  part  second  of  your  third  sermon,  you 
make  "  an  attempt"  to  answer  some  objections. — 
Let  us  see  whether  your  "  attempt"  is  effectual 
or  not. 

1.  "It  is  objected  that  this  view  of  the  doctrine, 
destroys  the  accountability  of  creatures."  I  sup- 
pose you  mean  rational  creatures  ;  and  not  stones 
and  trees,  and  all  material  substances,  all  which 
are  creatures.  However,  on  your  principle  there 
is  no  difference  ;  for  the  stone  attracted  to  the  earth 
by  the  law  of  gravitation,  or  the  water  descending 
from  the  clouds,  are  equally  responsible  with  men. 
According  to  "  this  view  of  the  doctrine,"  a  man 
acts  as  much  under  the  control  and  immediate  di- 
rection of  an  almighty  energy,  as  does  the  needle 
under  the  attracting  power  of  the  load-stone.  And 
it  is  as  absurd  to  talk  about  the  responsibilty  of 
man,  on  your  "  view"  of  election,  as  it  would  be  to 
talk  of  the  accountability  of  the  needle  in  the  com- 
pass. Your  whole  reply  to  this  objection  is  so  cu- 
rious, and  such  a  demonstration  of  your  utter  ina- 
bility to  accomplish  your  end,  that,  were  it  not  for 
its  verbosity,  it  would  be  worth  transcribing.  Af- 
ter making  several  unimportant  remarks,  not  at  all 


ON  ELECTION.  136 

in  point,  you  at  length,  in  p.  66,  make  an  asser- 
tion, the  truth  of  which  no  man  will  dispute — "  It 
is  the  choice  of  the  reprobate  that  Christ  should  not 
reign  over  them."  Is  it  indeed  ?  What  a  wonder, 
ful  discovery  this  !  I  thought  you  were  under  obliga- 
tion to  reconcile  man's  accountability  with  your 
doctrine.  We  all  know  it  is  their  choice.  But  the 
question  is,  can  they  choose  otherwise  ?  If  you  say 
they  can,  you  allow  they  can  add  themselves  to  the 
elect  number ;  and  in  that  case  in  what  a  pitiful 
condition  would  the  universe  be,  seeing  it  could  not 
be  good,  unless  there  were  reprobates  in  it.  If 
you  say  they  cannot  choose  otherwise,  which  you 
must  say  to  be  consistent  with  yourself,  then  you 
acknowledge  they  have  no  more  freedom  in  their 
choice,  than  the  feather  which  mounts  the  air.  If 
you  say  they  can  if  they  will ;  then,  I  ask,  why 
will  they  not  ?  You  probably  reply,  because  they 
have  no  disposition.  Why  this  want  of  disposition  ? 
-  Because  they  are  depraved.-'  From  whence  their 
depravity  ?  "  From  Adam's  fall."  Why  did  Adam 
sin  and  fall  ?  u  Because  he  would."  Who  deter- 
mined his  will  ?  "  God  is  as  much  the  author  of  sin- 
ful as  of  holy  volitions."  Contrast  p.  65.  "  Cal- 
vin, and  the  assembly  of  Divines  at  Westminster, 
assert  that  the  divine  decree  and  agency,  respecting 
the  existence  of  sin,  imply  more  than  a  bare  per- 
mission,  viz.  something  positive  and  efficacious," 
ibid.  From  this  it  is  evident.  Adam  could  not  bave 
done  otherwise  than  sin,  unless  it  is  supposed  pos- 
sible he  could  have  broken  the  eternal  decree,  or 


134  LETTER  111. 

have  resisted  the  irresistible  agency  of  God  ;  and 
therefore,  properly  speaking,  he  was  no  more  mas- 
ter of  his  own  volitions  than  the  elements  were,  out 
of  which  he  was  made. 

If  you  say  the  want  of  a  disposition  to  do  other- 
wise, is  the  only  cause  why  reprobates  choose  that 
Christ  should  not  reign  over  them,  it  leaves  us  just 
where  we  were.  For  they  cannot  in  the  smallest 
degree  be  accountable  for  an  indisposition,  which  is 
a  necessary  consequence  of  a  sin  in  which  they  took 
no  active  part.  This  sentiment  respecting  an  ina- 
bility to  do  good,  consisting  altogether  in  the  will, 
or  disposition,  is  unscriptural,  irrational,  and  contra- 
ry to  experience.  1.  It  is  unscriptural ;  Paul  saith, 
Rom.  vii.  18.  "  For  to  7uil!  is  present  with  mc  ;. 
but  hew  to  perform  that  which  is  good  I  find  not." 
Here  then  was  the  will  or  disposition  to  do  good,  but 
he  was  so  circumstanced  that  he  could  not  do  it, 
the  good  that  V  would  I  do  not.  The  same  senti- 
ment is  inculcated  to  the  Galatians,  v.  17.  "  And 
these  are  contrary  one  to  the  other,  so  that  ye  cannot 
do  the  things  that  ye  zconld."  2.  It  is  irrational.  It 
supposes  that  if  a  man  only  have  an  inclination,  will, 
or  disposition  to  do  a  thing,  he  must  do  it.  If  he 
have  no  disposition,  he  cannot.  This  disposition, 
then,  to  do,  or  not  to  do,  is  the  sovereign  of  the  soul : 
so  that  all  her  powers  lie  prostrate  before  the  dis- 
position. Does  it  not  follow  from  hence  that  every 
man  is  impelled  by  a  secret  something  called  a  dis- 
position to  do  every  thing  he  docs  ?  And  docs  not 
this  as  totally  destroy  the  free  volitions  of  a  man's 


ON  ELECTION.  135 

mind,  as  it  does  to  admit  he  is  directed  by  an  om- 
nipotent fate  ?  It  certainly  does — for  it  matters  not 
by  what  name  the  controlling  principle  is  distin- 
guished, if  man  be  compelled  to  obey  its  dictates, 
he  is  no  longer  free.  Whether  it  be  God,  motive, 
secret  influence ,  fat e ,  or  disposition,  so  long  as  any 
one  of  those  is  supposed  to  have  such  dominion 
over  the  soul,  that  she  cannot  act  otherwise  than  she 
is  thus  compelled,  she  is  no  longer  free.  To  be  free, 
man  must  be  complete  master  of  his  own  volitions. 
fie  must  not  only  have  power  to  choose,  but  he  must 
have  power  to  choose  otherwise,  and  to  follow  his 
choice.*  3.  It  is  contrary  to  experience.  This  proves 
that  a  christian  may  have  a  disposition  to  love  God 
as  perfectly,  and  to  serve  him  as  purely  as  do  the 
glorified  spirits  ;  but  he  cannot,  while  in  this  house 
of  clay.  A  poor  good  man  may  have  a  disposition 
to  feed  the  hungry,  and  clothe  the  naked,  but  cannot 

*  "  Without  freedom,  there  cannot  be  a  thinking  being,  hut  on- 
\y  a  b.ire  percipient  being  ;  for  thinking  implies  the  turning 
the  perceptive  capacity  from  one  perception  to  another,  by  an  act 
of  the  willf  otherwise  a  percipient  being  would  have  but  one 
solitary  perception  always  in  view.  And  if  the  being-  doth  not 
this  by  an  act  of  the  will,  but  is  impelled  by  an  external"  (or  in- 
ternal) "principle,  how  can  it  be  said  to  think, being-  acted,  and 
not  active,  in  every  thing-  beyond  bare  perceptivity  ?  What  is 
-it  to  to'dl?  Is  it  not  to  act  ?  If  it  be  to  act,  it  is  to  have  the 
internal  principle  of  action  :  and  if  it  hath  the  internal  princi- 
ple of  action,  it  must  be  free,  and  needs  not  be  further  acted 
or  impelled  in  thinking*.  An  active  being-,  a  thinking  being, 
and  a  free  being-  then,  are  synonymous  terms  "  Itawter's  In- 
quiry into  the  nature  vf  the  human  i.    p  203. 


*36  LETTER  III. 

for  the  want  of  ability.  So  the  wicked  may  have  a 
disposition  to  do  many  wicked  actions,  from  which 
they  are  restrained  by  an  overruling  providence. — 
Balaam  had  a  disposition  to  curse  Israel,  and  so  far 
as  human  power  is  necessary,  he  had  ability,  al- 
though he  was  prevented  by  a  fear  of  God.  Paul 
had  a  disposition  to  do  some  good  thing,  I  suppose 
to  get  free  from  the  body  of  death,  under  which  he 
groaned  previous  to  justification  •,  but  he  could  not, 
on  account  of  the  law  of  sin  in  his  members.  It  ap- 
pears therefore  improper  to  make  any  one  faculty  or 
power  of  the  soul,  sovereign  over  all  the  other  mem- 
bers. The  soul  having  command  over  her  own  vo- 
litions within  certain  prescribed  limits  peculiar  to 
human  beings,  she  may  act.  or  not  act  at  pleasure. — 
The  grace  of  God  is  always  ready  going  before  in 
matters  of  religion,  "preventing,"  restraining,  en- 
lightening, and  directing  the  inquiring,  serious  mind, 
in  all  things  pertaining  to  godliness.  With  this 
••  illustrious,  but  tremendous  power,  heaven  arms 
all  rationals."  Before  these  intelligent,  responsible 
beings,  God  places  life  and  death,  and  bids  them 
choose  life  that  they  may  lite.  The  free,  moral 
agency  of  man  is  so  evident,  that  all  are  forced  to 
admit  it  in  some  sense.  But  after  admitting  the  fact, 
to  shelter  their  tottering  system,  which  clashes 
against  it,  some  refine  it  so  much,  that  its  essence  is 
refined  away.  Thus,  sir,  you  say  man  acts  freely. 
But  how  ?  Why  that  he  freely  follows  the  corrupt 
principles  of  his  nature,  which  God  from  all  eternity 
determined  he  should  have ;  so  that,  in  fulfilling 


ON  ELECTION.  137 

the  desires  of  the  flesh  and  mind,  he  exactly  fulfills 
the  secret,  and  uncontrolable  will  of  God,  i.  c.  he 
freely  docs  what  God  decreed  he  should  freely  do  ; 
and  he  cannot  do  otherwise,  any  more  than  he  can 
fly  a  thousand  miles  in  the  air  !  I  excuse  you,  how- 
ever, for  only  giving  this  poor,  bald  freedom  to  man. 
It  is  all  your  system  will  allow.  Your  own  good 
sense,  I  am  persuaded,  would  have  allowed  more  ; 
but  you  were  so  fettered  with  the  chain  of  decrees, 
that  you  could  not  do  the  thing  you  would* 

2.  "  How  unreasonable  it  would  be  for  the  dev- 
ils to  find  fault  with  Christ  for  not  giving  them  a 
place  in  his  kingdom, when,  at  the  same  time  they 
are  voluntarily  engaged  in  seeking  its  destruction," 
&G*  p.  66.  Voluntarily  engaged !  Were  not  all 
their  sins  decreed?  Ans.  p.  18.  "  As  soon  as  we 
have  proved,  that  one  sin  was  decreed,  we  have  re- 
moved all  the  objections  which  can  be  made  against 
supposing  that  all  the  sins  in  the  universe  were  de- 
creed.." Do  you  say  God  decreed  they  should  act 
voluntarily  ?  And  are  they  accountable  for  doing 
voluntarily  what  God  decreed  they  should  volunta- 
rily do  !  Does  this  make  them  responsible  ?  God 
decreed  that  water  should  freely  run  downwards  5 
therefore  the  water  is  accountable  ?  Is  not  this  a 
masterly  argument  to  convince  your  readers,  that 
your  ,;  view"  of  the  doctrine  of  election  is  compata- 
ble  with  accountability  .?  And  so  all  you  say  about 
the  hatred  of  the  Jews,  the  wickedness  of  Voltaire, 
Paine,  and  Hume,  amounts  to  no  more  than  this, 
That  they  acted  according  to  a  predetermination  of 
M  2 


138  LETTER  III. 

the  Almighty,  which  they  could  no  more  resist,  than 
you  can  reconcile  free  agency  and  accountability  in 
man,  with  your  doctrine  of  irrespective  decrees  to 
eternal  life,  and  eternal  death.  You  ask,  "  Would 
it  have  been  reasonable,  that  they  should  enter  a 
complaint  ?"  Yes  ;  upon  your  principle,  nothing 
more  reasonable.  On  supposition  your  doctrine  is 
true,  and  that  they  are  in  hell,  they  might  justly 
say,  Why  should  we  be  thus  punished  ?  We  have 
fulfilled  the  eternal  counsel  of  God's  will,  as  much 
as  Peter,  James,  and  John,  Nay,  by  our  wicked 
publications,  as  they  are  called,  we  promoted  the 
greatest  good  of  the  universe  ;  and  so  necessary 
were  our  bad  works,  that  the  elect,  as  they  are  cal- 
led, could  not  be  so  happy  without  them.  We 
were  included  in  the  all-comprehensive  counsel  of 
eternal  wisdom,  and  were  a  part  of  the  perfect 
plan  ;  and  as  the  zvhole  cannot  be  perfect  without 
all  the  parts,  we  were  equally  necessary  for  the  per- 
fection of  all  things,  as  were  Peter,  James,  and 
John.  Must  we  then  be  eternally  miserable  for 
contributing  so  great  proportion  (for  we  were  very 
kiboiious,  and  had  influence  over  the  minds  of  thou- 
sands,) towards  the  greatest  possible  good  ?  Thus 
your  doctrine  puts  a  reasonable  complaint  into  the 
mouth  of  every  sinner  on  earth,  or  in  hell.  Neither 
is  it  possible,  so  long  as  you  maintain  your  princi- 
ple of  universal  decrees,  of  unconditional  election 
to  eternal  life,  and  reprobation  to  eternal  death, 
scripturally  or  rationally  to  silence  their  com- 
plaints.    You  may  assert,  as  you  have  done  in  your 


ON  ELECTION.  139 

book.     But  the  naked  assertions  of  a  fallible  man. 


will  not  satisfy  candid  and  inquisitive  minds  ;  and 
a  system  which  manifestly  contradicts  a  fact  so  evi- 
dent as  the  freedom  of  man,  cannot  command  the 
belief  of  the  serious  and  rational  inquirer  after 
truth. 

3.  You  next  make  "  an  attempt'*  to  rescue  your 
doctrine  from  the  charge  of  partiality.  That  "a 
part  may  be  either  regarded  or  disregarded,  from  a 
desire  to  promote  the  general  good,"  is  admitted.— 
But  what  have  the  comparisons  which  follow,  to  do 
with  your  doctrine  ?  p.  67.  "  We  may  separate  a 
limb  from  the  body,  when  its  continuance  would  en- 
danger the  body.-' — Granted.  But  what  should  we 
think  of  a  man  who  would  make  an  incurable 
wound  in  one  of  his  limbs,  under  pretence  of  pro- 
moting the  good  of  his  whole  body  ?  When  a  putri- 
fying  limb  is  amputated,  is  the  good  of  the  whole 
body  obtained  ?  Is  not  a  limb  lost  ?  And  can  the 
body  be  as  perfect  without  this  limb,  as  it  would 
have  been  with  it  ?  We  grant  that  as  man  has  unne- 
cessarily brought  himself  into  this  disordered  state> 
God  may  justly  cut  off  some  of  the  human  family 
forever,  as  a  punishment  for  their  own  avoidable 
disobedience.  But  on  your  principle  it  is  absurd  to 
fcalk  about  amputating  a  limb,  because  it  is  un- 
sound ;  for  this  unsoundness  itself,  according  to  your 
notion,  was  produced  by  the  Almighty.  What 
would  be  said  of  a  physician  who  should  wound  the 
body  of  a  perfectly  healthy  person,  so  as  to  make 
(he  amputation  of  one  half  of  his  limbs  necessary  '•* 


140  LETTER  III.  * 

preserve  the  other  half,  under  pretence  of  promot- 
ing the  u  greatest  good  of  the  whole"  of  this  man's 
body.  Would  he  not  be  deemed  a  knave  or  a  fool  ? 
u  When  fire  breaks  out  in  a  city,  they  may  pull 
down  a  certain  building, — with  a  regard  to  the 
good  of  the  whole  city."  Ibid.  True.  But.  what 
would  be  said  of  a  magistrate  who  should  order  a 
city  set  on  fire,  under  pretence  of  seeking  the  wel- 
fare or  general  good  of  the  whole  city  1  What !  burn 
a  part,  to  promote  the  good  of  the  whole!  Such 
"  consummate  folly"  does  your  doctrine  attribute 
to  the  infinitely  wise  God. 

4.  Ibid.  "Impartiality" — "  docs  not  require  that 
all  guilty  persons  should  be  pardoned"  That  is 
not  so  clear.  If  all  are  equally  guilty  and  ill-de- 
serving, and  all  stand  precisely  in  the  same  rela- 
tion to  God,  impartiality  requires  that  if  one  he  par- 
doned, all  should  be  pardoned.  Strict  justice  will 
not  require  any  to  be  pardoned.  But  if  one  among 
the  many,  who  are  all  equally  guilty,  deserve  com- 
miseration, the  doctrine  of  impartiality  and  justice 
teach,  that  all  deserve  commiseration.  The  only 
question  is  then,  Whether  all  are  equally  guilty  and 
ill-deserving  ?  To  this  query  you  furnish  a  direct 
answer  in  page  60.  "  The  human  race  all  possess 
one  character,  and  that  is  a  wicked,  ill-deserving 
character."  Again,  p.  63,  u  For  this  was  equally 
true,  concerning  those  who  are  saved,"  (see  the 
preceding  line)  "  until  by  the  power  of  God,  they 
were  made  willing  to  submit."  Now,  sir,  I  ask, 
does  not  common  sense  dictate,  that  if  one  of  these 


ON  ELECTION.  141 

be  pardoned  without  any  condition  previously  per- 
formed, and  not  the  other,  it  impartiality  ?  All  are 
equally  guilty,  and  equally  helpless  and  miserable, 
and  therefore  impartiality  declares  as  much  in  fa- 
vour of  one  as  another.  You  go  on,  "  But  on  sup- 
position, that  extending  pardon  to  the  whole  of  this 
character,  would  diminish  the  happiness  of  the 
community  at  large,  it  would  be  a  proof  of  partiali- 
ty if  they  were  all  to  be  pardoned  ?"  p.  67.  Per- 
mit me  to  retort  this  argument, — But  on  supposition 
(hat  the  introduction  of  sin  into  the  world,  would 
diminish  the  happiness  of  the  community  at  large, 
it  would  be  proof  of  not  only  partiality,  but  also  of 
injustice  and  iitunercifulness  to  introduce  it.  But. 
sir,  you  suppose  an  impossible  case  on  your  system. 
For,  you  think,  that  those  who  are  once  pardoned., 
are  perfectly  secure,  and  will  be  everlastingly  hap- 
py. How  then  could  it  diminish  the  happiness  of 
the  community  at  large,  to  make  every  individual 
member  of  such  community  forever  happy  ?  This  is 
like  your  inconclusive  reasoning  about  the  "  great- 
est good  of  the  universe."  You  think  it  "  agreea- 
ble to  the  common  sense  of  mankind,  that  a  sove- 
reign has  no  right  to  put  a  difference'betwecn  his 
obedient  subjects."  Is  not  this  a  mistake  ?  May 
he  not  raise  some  to  higher  dignity  than  others  ? — 
Or  do  you  mean,  he  has  no  right  to  make  such 
vast  difference  between  them,  as  you  suppose 
God  makes  between  the  elect  and  reprobate.  Hold 
to  this,  and  your  jarring  system  is  ruined.  AVere 
not  all  the  Angels,  and  Adam,  God's  obedient  sub*. 


142  LETTER  III. 

jects  ?  And  yet  you  hold  that  God  put  such  a  vast 
difference  between  some  of  the  Angels,  as  to  doom 
a  part  of  them  to  everlasting  perdition,  merely  be- 
cause he  would  ?  And  why  did  the  Almighty  con- 
stitute Adam  guilty,  by  an  eternal  decree,  while  he 
was  yet  innocent  ?  Here  then  is  a  difference  as 
wide  as  heaven  and  hell,  made  among  God's  obe- 
dient subjects.  It  will  be  of  no  use  to  reply,  That 
they  rebelled.  For  according  to  your  doctrine,  the 
decree  of  reprobation  was  made  antecedent  to  their 
rebellion ;  and  their  rebellion  was  "  brought  to 
pass  by  God  himself,"  that  they  might  thereby  be 
iitted  for  eternal  misery.  Here  therefore  is  an  in- 
stance of  the  most  glaring  partiality ,  to  make  this 
eternal  difference,  by  an  irrevocable  decree,  while 
all  were  obedient  subjects.  And  what  had  poor 
Esau  done  before  he  was  born,  to  deserve  eternal 
punishment  ?  Do  not  say,  "  He  sinned  after  he  was 
born,  and  therefore  his  sin  was  the" — "  immediate, 
deserving  cause  of  his  death."  This  is  coming 
over  to  the  scripture  doctrine,  supposing  him  to  be 
miserable,  which  is  much  doubted.  You  do  not 
allow,  that  the  decree  of  reprobation  is  founded  on 
wickedness  foreseen.  This  would  be  giving  up  the 
point.  The  means  are  decreed,  as  well  as  the 
end.  God  therefore  decreed  Esau's  wickedness, 
that  he  might  answer  the  end  of  his  reprobation  ! — 
It  is  not  possible,  sir,  to  rescue  your  doctrine  from 
the  charge  of  partiality.  It  is  true  you  quote  a 
precious  text  of  scripture  to  prove  that  God  is  no 
respecter  of  persons  ;  and  you  might  have  quoted 


ON  ELECTION.  143 

an  hundred  more  without  benefiting  your  cause  any, 
so  long  as  you  hold  to  your  first  principle.  Wo 
know  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  and  that  in 
every  nation  he  that  feareth  God,  and  worketh  righ- 
teousness, is  accepted  of  him.  And  we  also  know 
that  your  "  view  of  the  doctrine"  fixes  the  re- 
proachful blot  of  partiality  upon  his  just  character  ; 
and  therefore  your  doctrine  is  unscriptural  and  ir- 
rational. 

o.  Your  next  "  attempt*'  is,  to  obviate  the  objec- 
tion. "  That  this  view  of  the  doctrine  of  election  is 
calculated  to  encourage  sin,  and  the  neglect  of  the 
means  of  grace,"  p.  69.  Instead  of  answering  this 
objection,  you  simply  assert,  that  "  means  are  not. 
thereby  rendered  unimportant."  You  then  quote 
some  scripture  to  prove  that  we  are  chosen  through 
sanctif  cation  of  the  Spirit,  and  belief  of  the  truth  ; 
and  to  recite  some  examples  to  prove  that  souls 
have  been  benefitted  by  the  ministry  of  the  word. 
But  what  is  all  this  to  the  point  ?  This  we  know  is 
scriptural.  But  it  is  not  a  consequence  of  your 
doctrine.  So  far  from  it,  that  if  your  scheme  be 
correct,  means  are  always  unavailing.  If  sinners 
are  regenerated  by  an  irresistible,  almighty  and 
secret  influence,  in  which  the  sinner  is  entirely  pas- 
sive, outward  means  and  external  motives,  arc 
completely  superceded.  Indeed  this  you  affirm  in 
plain  terms.  Page  74,  "  No  arguments  that  can  be 
used  will  persuade  rebels  to  submit,  and  sue  for 
mercy  upon  the  self-denying  terms  of  the  Gos- 
pel.    The  ablest  preacher  is  as  unable  to  persuade 


144  LETTER  HI. 

a  sinner  to  repent,  and  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesu^ 
Christ,  as  the  weakest."  If  preachers  cannot  in- 
strumentally  persuade  sinners  to  repent  and  accept 
of  mercy,  and  if  all  arguments  are  unavailing,  then 
it  is  certainly  useless  to  preach,  and  lost  labour  to 
reason  with  them.  It  seems,  however,  you  cannot 
go  far  without  crossing  your  tracks,  so  intricate  is 
error.  See  another  instance  of  it.  "Many  of  them 
determined  to  go  to  hear  him,"  (i.  e.  Paul  preach). 
"  This  they  did  repeatedly.  The  consequence  was, 
they  became  believers  in  this  religion,  and  were  sav- 
ed," p.  70.  A  consequence  supposes  a  cause. — 
Their  faith  and  salvation,  you  say  were  a  conse- 
quence of  hearing  Paul  preach.  In  the  former  case 
you  say,  the  ablest  preacher  is  unable  to  persuade 
a  sinner  to  repent,  &c.  One  would  think  that  a 
system  which  involves  its  abettors  in  such  contra- 
dictory assertions,  would  be  suspected  at  least ; 
and  that  its  advocates  would  be  induced  to  review 
their  ground.  Here  also  you  proceed  on  the  false 
supposition  that  your  doctrine  of  unconditional 
election,  is  the  only  doctrine  which  teaches  salva- 
tion by  grace.  This  certainly  is  a  mistake,  as  I 
have  before  observed.  And  all  who  have  read  our 
writings,  and  candidly  considered  our  doctrines, 
well  know  that  no  body  of  Christians  ever  insisted 
upon  this  truth,  Salvation  is  of  grace,  through  faith, 
more  strenuosly  than  we  do.  Neither  is  it  set  aside 
by  fair  inference  from  any  of  our  principles.  We 
know  that  sinners  must  be  brought  to  see  their  na- 
tive  vileness,  and  the   utter  inefficiency   of  their 


ON  ELECTIOxN.  146 

own  works  to  justify  them  in  the  sight  of  God  ;  and 
that  they  must  believe   in  Christ  as  their  glorious 
substitute,  in  order  to  be  saved.     That  they  must 
be  born  of  the  Spirit,  and  be  made  holy,  to  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  God.     But  we  olso  teach  that 
damnation  is  wholly  from   ourselves  ;    that  it  ori- 
ginates in  the  rebellious  conduct  of  sinners,  who 
abuse  the  forbearance  of  God,  and  not  from  a  de- 
cree of  reprobation,   which  was  made  antecedently 
to  their  existence,  which  secured  the  wicked  means 
necessary  to  bring  about  the  dreadful  end.     And 
that  it  ever  did  any  good  to  preach  your  doctrine 
of  unconditional  election,  and  its  dreadful  counter- 
part, unconditional  reprobation,  remains  to  be  pro- 
ved.    For  that  mankind  are  naturally  sinners,  and 
are  entirely  dependent  on  God  for  every  good  and 
perfect  gift,  are  not  the  peculiarities  of  Hopkinsian- 
ism.     These   important  truths  of  the  Gospel,  we 
deem  essential  to  the  salvation  of  sinners  ;  there- 
fore we  inculcate  them  on  all  proper  occasions. -?- 
The  success  therefore,    of  a  Gospel  ministry  does 
not  depend  upon  preaching  your  doctrine  of  per- 
sonal election.     If  indeed,  it  were  true,  a  blessing 
would  attend  its  publication.     But   it  is  not  true, 
and  therefore  a  holy  God  can  never  sanction  it. — 
When  you  leave  it  out  of  sight,  and  preach  Jesus 
Christ  and  him  crucified,  as  the  Saviour  of  sinners, 
(which  is  not  a  peculiar  trait  of  your  doctrine,)  and 
exhort  them  to  look  to  him  alone  for  salvation,  you 
no  doubt  see  the  blessed  effects  of  your  ministry  in 
the  awakening  and  conversion  of  souls.     But  think 


146  LETTER  III. 

you,  sir,  that  you  are  the  only  men  with  whom  this 
wisdom  dwells  ?  and  that  if  the  peculiarities  of  your 
system  die,  this  wisdom  must  die  with  them  ?  So 
you  seem  to  intimate.  But  let  any  candid,  con- 
siderate man,  look  into  the  Christian  world,  and  re- 
view it  for  a  century  past,  and  then  say,  whom  the 
Lord  Jesus  has  delighted  to  honour,  as  instruments 
in  his  hands  of  turning  sinners  from  darkness  to 
light,  and  from  the  power  of  Satan  to  God.  Al- 
though you  are  pleased  to  insinuate  that  we  are  the 
ministers  of  Satan,  yet  there  are  very  many  who 
can  witness  that  we  have  been  unto  them  a  sweet 
savour  of  Christ.  There  is  no  necessity  therefore 
to  have  the  doctrine  of  unconditional  election  H  pro- 
videntially thrown  in  their  way,  to  blast  all  their 
fair  prospects,  which  they  were  building  on  them- 
selves," p.  76.  By  this  you  insinuate  that  all  who 
do  not  believe  in  yoa-r  peculiar  doctrine,  must  ne- 
cessarily H  build  on  themselves.*"  It  is  well  for  us 
that  we  are  able  to  disprove  your  uncharitable  hint, 
by  a  thousand  testimonies.  It  seems  you  make  your 
doctrine  of  election  the  foundation.  How  different 
did  the  Apostle  teach.  Other  foundation  can  no 
man  lay,  than  that  which  is  laid,  which  is  Christ 
Jesus.  Do  you  not  think  you  could  have  taught  the 
people  better,  by  telling  them  that  unconditional 
election  to  eternal  life,  and  predestination  to  eternal 
death,  is  the  true  foundation ;  and  that,  unless  this 
were  "  providentially  thrown  in  their  way,"  they 
would  "  build  on  themselves."  Thank  God,  there 
i§  sufficient  room  for  all  to  build  on  Christ,  the  real 


ON  ELECTION.  W 

and  living  foundation,  without  going  to  the  imagin- 
ary and  false  foundation  of  election  and  reproba- 
tion. Yes,  fellow  sinners,  there  is  love  enough  in 
God  the  Father,  and  merit  enough  in  his  Son  Jesus 
Christ,  and  efficacy  enough  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  to 
draw  you  all,  to  atone  for  your  sins,  and  to  apply 
the  merits  of  this  atoning  blood  so  as  to  pardon  and 
sanctify  you  wholly.  If  then  you  are  not  saved,  it  is 
your  own  fault.  The  Lord  calls  you  to  himself  by 
a  thousand  alarming  and  endearing  motives.  There 
is  no  horrible  decree  of  reprobation  to  stop  your 
path.  You  may  behold  a  smiling  God  in  the  face 
of  Jesus  Christ,  if  you  are  willing  to  forsake  your 
sins,   and  return  unto  him. 

6.  P.  71.  "  If  children  are  trained  up  in  the  way 
they  should  go,  they  are  more  likely  to  be  saved, 
than  they  are  if  trained  up  in  the  way  they  should 
not  go."  Granted.  But  does  your  doctrine  allow 
this  ?  Quite  the  reverse  •,  for  you  explode  every 
kind  of  work  from  having  any  thing  to  do  in  our  elec- 
tion. But  here  you  turn  a  rigid  Arrnlnian.  and 
put  more  confidence  in  works  than  you  ought. — 
You  even  say,  pious  parents  may  "•  obtain  blessings 
for  their  seed,  whom  he  chose  in  Jesus  Christ,  be- 
fore  the  foundation  of  the  world. "  But  if  they  were 
chosen  before  the  foundation  of  the  world,  in  Jesus 
Christ,  I  think  all  necessary  blessings  were  obtained 
for  them  ;  and  therefore  in  whatever  way  they  may 
be  trained  up,  they  will  Unquestionably  be  saved. 
41  God  makes  one  part  of  his  scheme  suit  the  other,'* 
ibid*     True  ;  but  docs  one  part  of  your  scheme  suit 


143  LETTER  III. 

the  other?  Do  your  decrees  and  commands,  which 
you  say  are  in  opposition  one  to  the  other,  suit 
and  harmonize  together  ?  Does  that  part  of  your 
•'  scheme"  with  which  God  is  displeased  suit  that 
part  with  which  he  is plcetsca I?  How  does  that  part 
of  your  scheme  which  asserts  that  God  from  all 
eternity  reprobated  a  part  of  mankind  to  sin  and 
damnation,  "  suit"  that  part  which  acknowledges 
'the  atonement  was  full  and  complete  for  all  ?  Did 
Christ  make  atonement  for  those  for  whom  God  the 
Father  never  had  any  thoughts  of  mercy  ?  Does  not 
rliis  scheme  of  yours  set  God  the  Father,  and  God 
'he  Son  at  variance  ?  One  determined  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world  that  precisely  so  many  of 
the  human  race  should  be  first  fitted  for,  and  then 
sent  to,  everlasting  destruction  ;  the  other  actually 
•  tied  for  their  sins,  that  they  mirrht  be  saved.  Can 
you  make  these  jarring  parts  of  your  system  har- 
monize ':  Perhaps  you  will  say,  "  I  am  under  no 
obligation  to  answer  these  impertinent  questions." 
But  hold,  sir,  are  you  under  no  obligation  to  make 
he  several  parts  of  your  system  suit  each  other? 
V'ou  cannot  suppose  the  public  have  such  unlimited 
confidence  in  your  naked  assertions,  as  to  set  aside 
scripture,  rational  argument,  and  the  dictates  of 
common  sense. 

7.  You  think  your  doctrine  does  not  encourage 
sin.  Let  us  try  it  in  an  instance  or  two.  Esau  / 
you  are  an  impious  man.  You  ought  not  to  injure 
the  feelings  of  your  pious  parents  by  selling  your 
birth-right,  and  then  by  marrying  one  of  another 


ON  ELECTION.  14* 

nation.     This  course  of  life  will  unavoidably  lead 
you  to  destruction.  "  Destruction!  Was  I  not  doom- 
ed to   destruction    before    the    foundation   of   the 
world  ?  And  do  you  not  teach  that  reprobates  must 
be  fitted  in  time  by  wicked  works,  for  a  miserable 
eternity  ?     Besides,  do  you  not  openly  affirm  that 
all  the  sins  in  the  universe  were  decreed  ?  How  then 
am  I  to  avoid  them  ?  If  I  am  absolutely  doomed  to 
misery  in  the  world  to  come,  I  think  it  best  to  take 
my  fill  of  sin  in  this.     I  will  therefore  indulge  my- 
self in  malice  and  revenge,  even  to  the  murder  of 
my  cheating,  elect  brother,  and  any  other  sinful 
passion.     Do  not  blame  me.     All  the  words  I  now 
utter,  according  to  your  doctrine,  however  wicked, 
and  all  my  actions,  however  vicious,  were  eternally 
fixed  by  a  '  perfect  plan,'  which  includes    '  all  the 
sins  in  the  universe.'    How  am  I  to  reform  ?  More- 
over, you  tell  me,  my  sins  are  necessary  for  the 
1  greatest  good  of  the  universe.'     And  surely  you 
would  not  have  me  refrain  from  that  course  of  life 
which  is  so  necessary  for  the  perfection  of  the  uni- 
verse.    As  to  your  notion  about  hell,  since  I  have 
heard  your  doctrine,  I  seriously  doubt  whether  there 
be  any  punishment   in  the  other  world.     For  you 
inform  me  God  is  just  and  good,  and  I  conclude  that 
a  just  and  good  being  cannot  send  me  to  hell  for 
doing  his  will,  and  for  being  instrumental  of  so  much 
good  to  the  universe.     If  I  were  to  reform  all  the 
days  of  my  life,  it  would  be  of  no  avail  if  I  am  a 
reprobate ;  and  if  I  am  one  of  the  elect,  I  shall 
finally  be  saved."     Now  sir,  can  you  silence  hia> 
N  2 


150  LETTER  III. 

upon  your  a  scheme  ?"  Every  candid  man  must  ac- 
knowledge that  his  inferences  are  fairly  drawn  from 
your  doctrines.  Your  doctrine  therefore,  is  an 
encourager  of  sin,  inasmuch  as  it  takes  away  every 
motive   to  reformation. 

8.  Let  us  also  try  an  experiment  upon  one  whom 
We  may  suppose  belongs  to  the  elect  number,  but 
unconverted,  except  it  be  to  your  doctrine  of  uncon- 
ditional election.  Jacob  ;  it  is  no  time  for  you  to 
lie  and  cheat,  in  order  to  accumulate  wealth,  which 
must  soon  perish.  You  ought  to  be  laying  up  trea- 
sure in  heaven — time  is  short,  and  eternity  depends 
upon  the  right  improvement  of  time.  "  Improve- 
ment of  time !  Would  you  have  me  turn  Methodist, 
and  undertake  to  merit  heaven  by  my  works  ?  Have 
you  not  repeatedly  told  me  I  have  no  moral  abili- 
ty, in  consequence  of  my  total  depravity,  to  return 
to  God  ?  Would  you  preach  to  the  totally  deaf,  and 
exhibit  the  beauties  of  heaven  to  the  blind  ?  Have 
you  not  demonstrated  that  I  cannot  repent,  until  I 
am  conquered  by  almighty  power  ?  And  would  you 
have  me  set  about  the  impossible  task  of  reforming 
myself?  This  "would  be  'building  on  myself.'  In 
the  day  of  God's  power  I  shall  be  brought  in,  if  I 
belong  to  the  elect ;  and  if  I  am  a  reprobate,  I  can 
no  more  be  saved  than  the  strong  decree  of  God 
can  fail  of  taking  effect.  Besides,  it  appears  to  me 
you  are  acting  inconsistent  with  your  own  principle, 
by  exhorting  me  to  repentance ;  for  you  have  as- 
serted, Ali  the  arguments  of  the  '  ablest  minis- 
ters' are  unavailing.      Why  then  would   you  use 


ON  ELECTION.  L5i 

them  ?  My  heart  is  in  the  hands  of  the  Lord,  and 
he  can  turn  it  which  way  soever  he  will.  If  God 
have  placed  his  everlasting  love  upon  me,  I  shall 
be  saved  do  what  I  may.  You  also  say,  That 
Paul  mentions  the  '  greatness  of  his  sins,  as  one 
reason  why  he  obtained  mercy.'  If  so,  the  greater 
my  sins,  the  more  reason  I  have  to  hope  for  mercy. 
Therefore,  as  I  feel  a  disposition  to  sin,  which  I 
am  informed  God  decreed  I  should  have,  I  think  it 
best  to  indulge  it,  that  I  may  obtain  mercy  :  I  also 
feel  a  desire  for  happiness  ;  but  I  am  forbidden  to 
seek  its  gratification  in  religion,  because  you  in- 
form me  this  is  selfish,  and  therefore  sinful.  Nay, 
according  to  your  principle,  which  I  believe,  I  caa 
do  nothing  but  sin,  until  God  works  a  '  radical 
change'  in  my  heart.  And  I  may  as  well  commit 
one  sin  as  another,  until  the  day  appointed  from  all 
eternity  arrives,  in  which  I  am  to  be  converted.  As 
to  cheating  and  lying,  I  consider  not  myself  ac- 
countable for  that,  since  it  was  absolutely  necessa- 
ry to  accomplish  the  purpose  of  heaven  ;  for  if  I 
had  not  done  it,  my  brother  Esau,  that  hated  repro- 
bate, would  have  obtained  the  paternal  blessing, 
and  I  should  have  been  the  reprobate,  and  he  the 
elect.  In  this  case  the  eternal  purpose  of  God 
would  have  failed.  So  that" — Stop,  thou  blasphe-.' 
mer — "But  why  accuse  of  blaspheming?  Were 
not  all  my  thoughts,  words  and  actions  decreed  ? — 
And  are  they  not  all  necessary  Jor  the  4  good  of  the 
great  whole  ?'  " 
9,  How.  sir,  will  you  obviate  such  objections  ?-— 


152  LETTER  IIL 

You  might  tell  him  that  his  reasonings  are  a  mark 
of  his  reprobation — That  he  ought  not  to  reply 
against  God,  seeing  the  potter  hath  power  of  the 
same  clay,  to  make  one  vessel  to  honour,  and  ano- 
ther to  dishonour.  But  this  would  not  meet  his  ob- 
jections ;  for  they  all  naturally  arise  out  of  your 
favourite  scheme.  They  are  fair  inductive  reason- 
ings from  your  first  principle  ;  and  therefore  it  is  not 
possible  to  refute  them  without  departing  from  your 
premises.  You  may  say,  That  the  scriptures  re- 
move such  objections.  True,  and  therefore  the 
scriptures  know  nothing  of  your  doctrine.  All  the 
objections  then  which  you  have  "  made  an  attempt" 
to  obviate,  remain  in  full  force.  And  from  what 
has  been  written,  may  be  predicated  the  following 
^argument — 

10.  Any  doctrine  which  destroys  the  responsibil- 
ity of  man,  which  represents  the  just  and  holy  God 
as  partial,  that  renders  ineffectual  the  means  of 
grace,  and  which  encourages  sin,  cannot  be  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Bible  :  but  your  u  view  of  the  doctrine 
of  election"  does  all  this ;  and  theroforc  it  is  not 
the  doctrine  of  the  Bible.  The  minor  proposition, 
which  alone  is  disputable,  is  proved  in  the  preced- 
ing arguments. 

(That  we  may  be  diligent  to  make  our  calling  and 
election  .sure,  is,  sir,  the  sincere  prayer  of  yours,  &c<. 

N.  BANGS. 

Rev.  S.  Williston,  Durham,  N*  Fe 

Bhinebeck,  May  3d,  181$. 


LETTER  JV. 


ON    CHRISTIAN    PFRFlXriON. 


Rev.  Sir, 

XlAVING  shown  in  my  former  letter,  the  incon- 
sistency of  your  doctrine  of  personal  election,  1 
come  now  to  examine  what  you  say  respecting 
u  sinful  imperfection.'1  It  is  matter  of  some  sur- 
prise, that,  after  all  which  has  been  said  and  writ- 
ten to  the  contrary,  you  should  strive  to  impose 
upon  the  public  a  belief,  that  we  hold,  "  that  saints 
in  this  life  are  as  perfect  as  they  will  be  in  heaven.'1 
p.  103,  note.  O  sir,  is  it  fair,  is  it  consistent  with 
that  charily  which  hopeth  all  things,  thus  to  misre- 
present a  body  of  people  !  And  how  do  you  at- 
tempt to  prove  your  assertion  ?  Why,  "  By  the  ar- 
gument which  they  use  in  their  book  of  Discipline 
against  the  power  of  death  to  sanctify,"  ibid.  And 
pray  sir,  do  you  really  believe  in  the  power  of 
death  to  sanctify  ?  It  would  seem  so  by  this  obser- 
vation of  yours,  as  also  from  what  you  say  about 
Paul's  desiring  to  die,  because  death  would  put  an 
end  to  that  body  of  sin  under  which  he  groaned. — 
But  from  what  part  of  the  scriptures  do  you  prove 
this  strange  doctrine  ?    Does  not  John  say,  1  John 


154  LETTER  IV. 

i.  7.  The  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  his  Son,  cleanseth  us 
from  all  sin?  Does  not  the  apostle  Paul  ask,  Heb. 
ix.  14.  How  much  more  shall  the  blood  of  Christ, 
who  through  the  eternal  Spirit,  offered  himself  with- 
out spot  to  God,  purge  your  conscience  from  dead 
works  to  serve  the  living  God?  In  this  passage  they 
are  said  to  be  purged  from  dead  works,  by  the  blood 
of  Christ,  that  they  might  serve  the  living  God. — 
But  if  they  do  not  serve  the  living  God  until  purifi- 
ed, and  if  death  acts  as  a  purifier,  then  we  do  not 
serve  the  living  God  until  after  death.  It  is  seri- 
ously doubted  whether  a  solitary  passage  of  scrip- 
ture can  be  found  in  all  the  Bible  to  support  the 
idea,  that  death  is  the  destroyer  of  sin.  On  the  con- 
trary, death  is  all  along  represented  as  a  consequence 
of  sin,  and  the  last  enemy.  Shall  the  effect  destroy 
its  cause  ?  And  shall  the  enemy  of  mankind  do  the 
most  friendly  and  beneficial  act  towards  them  ?— • • 
The  "  arguments,"  therefore  "  which  we  use 
against  the  power  of  death  to  sanctify,"  do  not  ne- 
cessarily suppose,  that  we  are  as  sinless  in  this  life, 
as  are  the  spirits  of  jnst  men  made  perfect*  It  is 
true,  we  wish  to  ascribe  the  glory  of  our  salvation, 
from  the  foundation  to  the  top-stone,  to  Jesus  Christ, 
and  not  to  death :  and  in  this  respect  we  accord 
with  the  holy  scriptures,  which  teach  us  to  ascribe 
honour  and  glory  unto  him  that  loved  us,  and  zvashed 
us  in  his  own  blood. 

As  the  consequence  which  you  endeavour  to  infer 
from  our  doctrine,  has  no  connexion  with  it,  so 
neither  do  we  hold  it  in  principle*     And  you  might- 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.      155 

have  convinced  yourself  of  this,  if  you  had  taken 
the  trouble  of  looking  in  our  discipline,  instead  of 
quoting  merely  from  recollection,  and  perhaps  from 
hearsay.*  To  convince  you  of  your  mistake,  I 
will  transcribe  some  passages  from  the  discipline, 
published  in  1808.  P.  120,  After  having  shewn  the 
difference  between  the  Mosaic  economy,  compre- 
hending the  political,  moral,  and  ceremonial  laws, 
and  the  Adamic  law  of  innocence  ;  and  also  shew* 
ing  the  reason  why  men  cannot  fulfil  the  require- 
ments of  the  latter,  the  author  concludes  thus, — 
••  Consequently,  no  man  is  able  to  perform  the  ser- 

*  As  a  proof  that  your  memory  is  very  treacherous,  or  that 
you  never  read  our  discipline,  it  is  proper  to  observe,  that  in 
the  discipline  there  is  not  one  argument  used  against  the 
power  of  death  to  cleanse  from  sin.  It  is  simply  asserted 
that  a  ghristian  may  be  cleansed  from  sin  l*  before  death,"  p. 
58.  This  is  the  only  place  in  the  discipline  which  speaks 
on  the  doctrine  of  perfection,  besides  Mr.  Wesley's  "plain  ac- 
count," from  which  I  hare  made  the  above  extracts;  and  in 
neither  of  which  is  the  argument  to  which  yoH  have  alluded, 
used.  Mr.  Fletcher ,  in  his  6th  volume  of  "  Checks  to  Anti- 
nomianism,"  uses  many  unanswerable  arguments  against  a 
"  death  purgatory."  And  lest  you  should  "  attempt"  to  de- 
fend the  error  there  exposed,  or  the  no  less  fatal  one  of  the 
.Roman  Catholics,  I  would  take  the  liberty  to  recommend  the 
volume  just  mentioned  to  your  serious  perusal.  If  you  give  it 
an  impartial  reading,  I  think  you  will  no  longer  oppose  the 
scriptural  doctrine  of  christian  perfection,  and  defend  "sin- 
ful imperfection."  I  would  also  recommend  our  discipline  to 
your  consideration,  that  you  may  not  again  expose  your  want 
of  information  respecting  our  doctrines ;  for  I  prefer  imputing 
your  erroneous  statements  to  inattention,  than  to  wilful  mis- 
representation. 


156  LETTER  IV. 

vice,  which  the  Adamic  law  requires."  Compare 
this  with  p.  106.  "To  explain  myself  a  little  farther 
on  this  head  ;  1 .  Not  only  sin,  properly  so  called, 
that  is,  a  voluntary  transgression  of  a  known  law, 
but  sin,  improperly  so  called,  that  is,  an  involunta- 
ry transgression  of  a  divine  law,  known  or  unknown, 
needs  the  atoning  blood.  2.  I  believe  there  is  no 
such  perfection  in  this  life,  as  excludes  these  invol- 
untary transgressions,  which  I  apprehend  to  be  nat- 
urally consequent  on  the  ignorance  and  mistakes  in- 
separable from  mortality.  3.  Therefore  sinless 
perfection  is  a  phrase  I  never  use,  lest  I  should 
seem  to  contradict  myself.  4.  I  believe  a  person 
filled  with  the  love  of  God,  is  still  liable  to  these  in- 

It  is  true  that  in  several  places  in  Mr.  Wesley's  Plain  Account 
of  Christian  Perfection,  it  is  affirmed,  That  christians  may  be 
cleansed  from  sin  before  death  ;  which  affirmation  is  supported 
by  a  number  of  texts — among  which  are  the  following, — "  He 
hath  raised  up  an  horn  of  salvation  for  us — to  perform  the 
mercy  promised  to  our  fathers  ;  the  oath  which  he  sware  to 
our  father  Abraham,  that  he  would  grant  unto  us,  that  we  be- 
ing delivered  out  of  the  hands  of  our  enemies,  should  serve 
him  without  fear,  in  holiness,  and  righteousness  before  him, 
all  the  days  of  our  life"  Luke  i.  ver.  69,  &.c.  "  Herein  is  our 
love  made  perfect,  that  we  may  have  boldness  in  the  day  ©f 
judgment,  because  as  he  is,  so  are  -we  in  this  world.'*  1  John 
iy.  17.  Could  such  unequivocal  testimony  be  brought  to  es- 
tablish your  doctrine  of  predestination,  you  would  have  no 
cause  to  fear  for  its  safety ;  because  all  believers  in  the  au- 
thenticity of  scripture  must  yield  their  assent  to  its  evidence. 
I  meant,  however,  to  observe  that  there  is  a  material  differ- 
ence between  saying  and  proving  that  a  christian  may  be 
saved  from  sin  before  death,  and  reasoning  against  the  '  poto* 
w  of  dedfth  to  sanctify." 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.      157 

voluntary  transgressions.  5.  Such  transgressions 
you  may  call  sins,  if  you  please ;  I  do  not  for  the 
reasons  above  mentioned. "  Take  another  instance 
from  page  123,  ';  But  the  best  of  men  may  say, 
Thou  art  my  light,  my  holiness,  my  heaven. — 
Through  my  union  with  thee,  I  am  full  of  light,  of 
holiness,  and  happiness.  And  if  I  were  left  to  my- 
self, I  should  be  nothing  but  sin.  darkness,  and 
hell."  "  The  best  of  men  need  Christ  as  their 
priest,  their  atonement,  their  advocate  with  the 
Father ;  not  only,  as  the  continuance  of  their  every 
blessing  depends  on  his  death  and  intercession,  but 
on  account  of  their  coming  short  of  the  law  of 
love." 

From  these  quotations,  all  of  which  are  taken 
from  our  discipline,  it  is  undeniably  plain,  1.  That 
we  believe  that  a  perfect  christian,  when  consider- 
ed in  relation  to  the  Adamic  law,  falls  far  short  of 
its  requirements ;  and  therefore,  on  this  account, 
may  be  denominated  a  transgressor.  2.  But  that 
no  man  since  the  fall  is  under  that  law,  because  it 
is,  properly  speaking,  a  law  of  works  ;  whereas  we 
are  under  the  dispensation  of  grace.  And  will  yon 
undertake  to  prove,  that  the  gloritied  saints  in  heav- 
en do  not  perfectly  fulfil  this  law  ?  Are  they  not 
perfectly  freed  not  only  from  sin,  but  also  from  all 
its  consequences  ?  At  least  at  the  resurrection,  ' 
when  their  glorified  bodies  shall  become  like  unto 
Chrises  most  glorious  body.  If  you  cannot  prove 
this,  neither  can  you  prove  that  we  hold  to  as  great 
perfection  in  this  life,  as  the  saints  in  heaven  pos* 
6 


158  LETTER  IV. 

^ess.  3.  That  such  is  our  situation,  surrounded 
with  temptations,  the  spirit  shrouded  in  a  corrupti- 
ible  body,  our  reasoning  powers  impaired,  that  we 
frequently  involuntarily  transgress  the  law  of  love, 
under  which  we  are  ;  but  that  these  are  not  sins, 
'••'  properly  so  called. "  4.  That  therefore  we  con- 
tinually need  the  atoning  merits  of  Christ  to  wash 
us,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  to  help  our  infirmities. — 
After  reading  these  remarks,  it  is  possible  you  may 
think,  that,  among  other  sins,  which  you  suppose 
you  momentarily  commit,  you  have  been  guilty,  I 
hope  unintentionally,  of  the  sin  of  misrepresentation. 
Having  made  these  observations  to  remove  the  mis- 
apprehension which  may  have  arisen  in  the  minds 
of  your  readers,  respecting  bur  ideas  of  christian 
perfection,  I  proceed  to  examine,  in  the  first  place, 
those  texts  of  scripture  with  which  you  attempt  to 
support  your  doctrine  of  "  sinful  imperfection." 

I.  1.  If,  when  Solomon  said,  There  is  not  a  just 
man  upon  earth  that  doeth  good  and  sinneth  not,  he 
meant  there  were  none  but  that  sinned  against  the 
Adamic  laic,  that  text  cannot  be  considered  as  con- 
tradicting the  doctrine  of  evangelical  perfection, 
so  often  alluded  to  in  the  New  Testament.  It  is 
"  probable  he  meant  those  involuntary  transgressions, 
which,  under  the  ceremonial  law,  required  an  atone- 
ment. Lev.  iv.  13,  14,  15.  And  if  the  whole  con- 
gregation  of  Israel  sin  through  ignorance,  &.C. — 
}Vhen  the  sin  which  they  have  sinned  against  it  shall 
hz  known,  then  the  congregation  shall  offer  a  young 


ON  CHRISTIAN,  PERFECTION.       i$B 

bullock  for  the  sin,  &c.  According  to  the  strict  re- 
quirements of  the  ceremonial  law,  if  a  man  happen- 
ed to  touch  a  dead  carcase,  he  was  accounted  un- 
rlccnu  and  therefore  in  the  eye  of  that  law  a  trans- 
gressor ;  and  even  these  sins  of  ignorance  required 
an  atonement.  Considered  in  relation  to  this,  or 
the  Adamic  law,  it  may  be  truly  said,  There  is  not 
a  just  man  upon  earth,  that  doeth  good  and  sinneth 
not.  To  such  a  perfection  of  holiness  as  exempts 
christians  from  these  infirmities,  or  sins,  if  you 
please  to  call  them  so,  we  do  not  expect  any  man  to 
arrive  in  this  life.  And  that  Solomon  never  de- 
signed to  teach  that  every  just  man  must  wilfully 
sin  against  a  known  law,  every  moment  of  his  life, 
is  evident  from  verse  18.  For  he  that  fear  eth  God, 
shall  come  forth  of  them  all.  Solomon  saith  in  the 
same  book,  All  is  'vanity  and  vexation  of  spirit. — 
And  you  might  as  well  infer  from  these  words,  that 
religion,  and  eternal  happiness,  is  vanity,  as  to  sup- 
pose from  the  former  words,  that  he  taught  the  ab- 
solute necessity  of  living  in  habitual  sin. 

2.  As  you  lay  great  stress  upon  the  experience  of 
the  Apostle  Paul,  from  his  words  in  the  seventh  of 
Romans,  it  is  necessary  to  examine  this  part  of  the 
subject  with  attention.  It  is  matter  of  no  little  sur- 
prise, that  any  considerate  man  should  take  it  for 
granted,  that  in  this  chapter  the  apostle  should  be 
relating  his  present  experience  and  exercise,  as  an 
apostolic  christian,  possessing  the  liberty  of  God-s 
children ;  when  it  is  so  manifest,  that  he  either  in- 
troduced his  experience  while  under  the  condemna? 


Do  LETTER  IT. 

tory  sentence  of  the  law,  before  he  was  delivered 
from  its  just  sentence,  merely  to  illustrate  the  doc- 
trine he  had  previously  taught ;  or  otherwise  simply 
personated  any  man  who  should  be  groaning  under 
the  burden  of  sin,  from  a  just  npprehension  of  its 
.rage,  while  under  the  cutting  sentence  of  the  righte- 
ous law.  To  prove  that  he  did  not  design  to  repre- 
sent his  own  christian  experience,  at  the  time  he 
wrote,  we  need  only  collate  what  he  there  says 
with  what  he  says  elsewhere.  He  saith,  chap.  vii. 
14.  But  I  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin.  Chap.  viii.. 
*£>.  For  to  be  ca  malty  minded  is  death.  Chap.  vi. 
23.  For  the  wages  of  sin  is  death.  Now.  according 
to  your  representation,  Paul,  in  the  seventh  chapter, 
expressed  his  invariable  experience  as  a  christian. 
Let  us  bring  this  interpretation  to  the  test  of  truth, 
and  try  its  merits,  J  am  carnal.— To  be  carnally 
minded  is  death. — Sotd  under  sin. — The  wages  of' 
$in  is  death.  According  to  this  he  was  an  enemy  to 
God,  while  reconciled  to  him — in  the  road  to  death,, 
ie  enjoy ihg  life  and  peace.  In  chap.  v.  10.  he 
speaks  of  his  being  reconciled  to  God.  Can  a  man 
be  at  enmity  with  God,  and  reconciled  to  him  at  the- 
same  time?  To  be  carnally  minded  is  death.  Can 
a  man  have  the  carnal  mind,  and  of  course  be  in  the 
vv;.y  to  death  ;  and  yet  be  spiritually  minded,  and 
of  course  be  in  the  way  of  life  and  peace,  at  the 
same  time  ?  Impossible.  Chap,  vii,  2.  I  see  ano- 
ther law  in  my  members,  warring  against  the  law  of 
my  mind,  and  bringing  me  into  captivity  to  the  law 
of  sin,  which  is  in  my  members.     Chap.  viii.  2.  For 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       161 

the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus,  hath 
made  mo  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death.  Dark- 
ness is  not  more  opposite  to  light,  than  the  condi- 
tion of  the  person  mentioned  in  the  former  text,  is, 
from  the  one  spoken  of  in  the  latter.  Is  it  possible 
that  the  apostle  designed  to  teach  that  he  was  in 
captivity  to  the  lazv  of  sin,  and  yet  free  from  the 
same  laio  at  the  same  time  !  !  To  say  that  a  man  is 
in  captivity  to  an  enemy.  and/Vce  from  that  enemy 
at  the  same  time,  is  as  palpable  a  contradiction  as 
to  say  a  man  is  and  is  not  at  the  same  time.  Chap, 
vii.  19.  For  the  good  that  I  zvould  I  do  not.  but  the 
evil  that  I  would  not,  that  do  I.  ver.  18.  To  will  is 
present  with  me,  but  how  to  perform  that  which  is 
good  I  find  not.  This  he  spoke,  according  to  your 
comment,  of  himself,  while  under  the  influence  of 
the  spirit  of  liberty,  after  having  received  the  spirit 
of  adoption.  Phil.  iv.  13.  /  can  do  all  thi?igs 
through  Christ,  who  strengthened  me.  The  saints 
are  said  to  be  created  in  Christ  Jesus  unto  good 
works,  Eph.  ii.  10.  In  the  former  text  Paul  saith, 
How  to  perform  that  which  is  good,  I  find  not;  in 
the  latter,  I  can  do  all  things.  Can  we  suppose  he 
meant  those  evil  things  which  he  hated  ?  Did  Christ 
strengthen  him  to  do  evil  ?  Is  it  possible  that  he  was 
such  a  bond  slave  to  sin  that  he  did  nothing  but 
evil,  all  the  days  of  his  life  ?  If  in  chap.  vii.  13.  he 
spoke  his  invariable  experience  as  a  chrisian  minis- 
ter, he  never  performed  that  good  which  he  zvould; 
but  was  always  under  the  influence  of  an  evil  which 
his  soul  hated  j  and  yet  strange  to  tell,  He  laboured 
o  c2 


*§%  LETTER  IV. 

more  abundantly  than  they  all — he  travelled  by  sta 
and  land  to  preach  the  everlasting  gospel — he  endu- 
red all  things  for  the  elects  sake,  that  they  might 
obtain  salvation — he  fasted  and  prayed,  zcrote  and 
preached,  endured  stripes  and  imprisonments,  suffer- 
ed cold,  hunger,  and  nakedness,  joyed  and  rejoiced  in 
Christ  Jesus,  abounded  in  the  love  of  God — lived  by 
faith  in  Christ  Jesus,  fought  the  good  fight — and  be- 
sides all,  he  had  the  care  of  all  the  churches. — And 
yet,  if  your  interpretation  be  accurate,  in  the  midst 
of  all  these  sufferings  and  labours,  he  was  under  the 
tyrannical  power  of  sin,  willing  to  do  good,  but  nev- 
er doing  it,  hating  evil,  and  always  subject  to  it. — - 
Did  then  the  strong  man  keep  the  palace  of  St. 
Paul's  heart  so  closely,  that  it  was  beyond  the  pow- 
er of  Jesus  Christ  to  bind  him  and  cast  him  out  ? — 
Is  not  this  representing  Christ  as  being  "  vanquish- 
ed, and  flying  before  the  conqueror  ?"  That  which 
I  do,  I  allow  not,  John  saith,  If  our  hearts  con- 
demn us,  God  is  greater,  and  knozoeth  all  things.' — 
Surely  the  great  apostle  to  the  gentiles  must  have 
been  in  a  pitiable  condition !  A  slave  to  sin,  con- 
demning himself,  and  of  course  condemned  by  the 
Lord — doing  the  evil  which  he  hated —  under  cap- 
tivity to  the  law  of  sin,  although  free  from  it — 
struggling  against  sin,  but  never  able,  although  the 
omnipotent  God  was  on  his  side,  to  overcome  it — an 
enemy  to  God,  under  the  influence  of  the  carnal 
mind  ! !  He  that  is  not  for  us  is  against  us,  saith 
Christ.  From  your  comment,  therefore,  Paul  was 
rking  againsi  the  kingdom  and  interest  of  Christ. 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       16S 

Such  *ir,  are  the  dreadful  consequences  resulting 
from  your  "  view"  of  the  seventh  chapter  to  the 
Romans.  There  must  be  some  capital  error  in  that 
"  scheme,"  which  represents  the  holy,  the  diligent, 
and  indefatigable  Apostle  in  such  a  contemptible 
light.  Nay,  according  to  your  own  interpretation 
of  the  text,  you  make  it  appear,  that  Paul  did  not 
please  God.  P.  31.  ';  By  his  flesh,  he  did  not  mean 
his  animal  nature. " — u  He  says,  that  with  the  flesh 
he  served  the  law  of  sin.  In  the  next  chapter  he 
testifies,  They  that  are  in  the  flesh  cannot  please 
God  ;  and  then  in  an  address  to  his  christian  breth- 
ren, he  adds,  But  ye  are  not  in  the  flesh,"  Now,  if 
by  the  flesh  "  he  did  not  mean  his  animal  nature," 
and  if  christians  are  not  in  the  flesh,  then  it  follows  J 
that  when  Paul  said,  With  the  flesh  he  served  the 
law  of  sin,  he  did  not  speak  of  himself  as  a  regene- 
rated man  :  or  if  he  did  speak  of  himself,  he  did 
not  please  God.  From  your  own  words,  therefore, 
you  are  reduced  to  this  dilemma,  Either  to  admit 
that  you  have  given  an  erroneous  interpretation  of 
the  text  under  consideration,  or,  that  Paul  never 
pleased  God.  Error  is  always  inconsistent  with  it- 
self. Like  the  serpent,  who  was  the  first  author  of 
it,  it  takes  a  meandering  course,  often  crossing  its 
own  tracks,  until,  by  its  intricate  maze,  it  leads  its 
advocates  into  inextricable  dilemmas. 

3.  Having  shewn  the  absurdity  of  your  interpret 
tation,  it  is  proper  to  propose  another  in  its  place* 
We  conceive  then,  that  the  Apostle  Paul,  in  the 
seventh  of  Romans,  designed*  either  to  speak  of  kit 


164  LETTER  IV. 

own  experience  while  under  the  law,  or  more  inde- 
finitely to  personate  any  one  under  conviction  for 
sin,  and  groaning  for  deliverance.  This  we  judge 
from  the  context.  The  5th  and  Gth  verses  contain 
the  doctrine  which  the  Apostle  illustrates  from  ver. 
7.  of  the  7th  chapter,  to  ver.  4,  of  the  8th  chapter, 
inclusive.  Ver.  5.  For  when  we  were  in  the  flesh, 
the  motions  of  sins ,  which  were  by  the  law,  did  work  in 
our  members  to  bring  forth  fruit  unto  death.  This 
proposition  he  takes  up  at  the  7th  verse,  and  illus- 
trates it  in  a  very  striking  manner,  by  personifying 
a  man  coming  to  the  knowledge  of  himself,  and 
viewing  the  justice  and  holiness  of  the  law  which 
writes  his  condemnation.  After  having  vindicated 
the  righteousness  of  the  law,  and  shewing  its  effects 
in  detecting  and  exhibiting  sin  in  ver.  7  and  8,  he 
says,  /  was  alive  without  the  law  once,  v.  9.  while 
ignorant  of  its  length  and  breadth,  of  its  spiritual 
nature  and  requirements,  I  thought  myself  a  living, 
obedient  servant  to  God.  This  is  precisely  the 
case  with  all  unhumbled,  pharisaical  professors  of 
religion.  Being  ignorant  of  the  spirituality  and  ho- 
liness of  the  law,  and  consequently  ignorant  of  the 
exceeding  sinfulness  of  sin,  they  go  about  to  estab- 
lish a  righteousness  of  their  own,  and  do  not  submit 
to  the  righteousness  of  God.  But  when  the  com- 
mandment came,  in  its  authoritative  influence  upoiv 
my  conscience,  by  which  spiritual  light  was  diffused 
into  the  dark  powers  of  my  soul,  so  that  I  saw  my 
native  vileness,  sin  revived,  it  made  a  struggle  for 
life,  and  /  died,  I  found  myself  destitute  of  spiritual 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       165 

union  with  God,  vcr.  10.  And  the  commandment 
rvhich  was  intended  for  life,  for  living,  active  fol- 
lowers of  God,  as  Adam  -was,  previous  to  his  trans- 
gression, and  as  all  truly  regenerated  men  arc,  I 
found  to  be  unto  death,  to  my  polluted  soul,  it  cutting 
asunder  all  my  imaginary  strings  of  spiritual  life, 
and  thus  destroying  all  my  towering  hopes  of  hap- 
piness, ver.  11.  How  coincident  is  this  to  the  ex- 
perience of  all  those  who  have  been  awaked  from 
their  delusive  dream  of  happiness  while  under  the 
power  of  sin,  and  yet  ignorant  of  their  stupid  state. 
For  sin,  taking  occasion  by  the  commandment,  taking 
advantage  of  my  ignorance  of  the  nature  and  design 
of  the  law,  deceived  me,  by  making  me  think  I  was 
alive  to  God,  while  dead  in  sin  ;  and  by  that  deceit 
:he  law  sieve  me,  taking  advantage  of  my  weakness,  it 
threw  me  almost  into  despair.  From  this  you  will 
perceive  that  the  law  is  holy,  not  deceitful,  like  the 
law  of  sin.  and  the  commandment,  holy,  just,  divid- 
ing to  every  one  their  right,  and  good,  perfectly 
answering  its  design,  v.  12.  In  verse  13,  he  shews 
that  the  law  was  not  the  cause  of  his  death — sin  was 
the  cause  ;  but  the  law  operating  upon  his  con- 
science, discovered  his  entire  separation  from  God, 
that  sin  the  cause  of  this  separation,  might  become,  or 
appear  exceeding  sinful.  For  now  all  we  who  are 
in  this  awakened  state,  know  that  the  law  is  spiritual  : 
but  I  am  carnal,  yet  in  the  flesh,  and  sold  under  sin^ 
a  perfect  slave  to  its  domineering  influence,  v.  14  ; 
so  that,  although  I  consent  unto  the  law  that  it  is 
good,  I  do  not  fulfil  its  precepts.     My  enlightened 


168  LETTER  IV. 

judgment  does  not  approve  of  what  I  do  ;  and  there- 
fore what  I  would,  that  do  I  not.  I  would  be  free 
from  this  state  of  spiritual  vassalage,  but  such  is 
my  weakness  in  my  present  unrenewed  state,  that 
I  cannot.  I  would  fulfil  the  requirements  of  the 
holy  law,  but  I  am  incompetent.  But  what  I  hate, 
that  do  I. — I  hate  sin  with  a  perfect  hatred,  yet  I 
find  the  motions  of  sins  work  in  my  members,  v.  15, 
16.  Is  not  this  a  most  lively  description  of  a  true 
penitent,  mourning  on  account  of  his  blindness  and 
hardness ;  and  yet  consenting  unto  that  very  law 
which  binds  him  ?  What  Christian  can  read  this 
portion  of  scripture  without  calling  to  mind  the 
days  of  his  spiritual  mourning,  and  his  earnest  de- 
sire for  deliverance.  Now  then  it  is  no  more  I  that 
do  it, — not  that  I  do  these  things  from  the  dictates 
-of  my  enlightened  judgment  and  reason ;  but  sin, 
which  hath  infused  its  poisoning  influence  through 
all  my  members,  carries  me  whither  I  would  not, 
v.  17.  For  I  know,  because  God  hath  shown  it 
me,  by  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  bringing  the 
holy  law  home  to  my  conscience,  that  in  me  (that  is 
in  my  flesh,  my  fallen  depraved  heart3)  dwelleth  no 
good  thing,  naturally ;  all  the  good  light  of  truth  I 
have  is  from  above  ;  and  all  the  good  desires  I  now 
have  for  deliverance  have  been  wrought  in  me  by 
the  eternal  Spirit.  In  consequence  of  this  deprav- 
ity, although  my  judgment  is  so  far  convinced,  that 
I  have  a  disposition  to  will  that  which  is  good,  yet 
how  to  perform  it  J  find  not,  v.  1 8.  For  the  good 
that  I  would,  I  do. not — Inasmuch  as  I  am  convin- 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       167 

ced  of  the  just  requirements  of  the  law,  1  would  ful- 
fil them,  but  I  do  not,  nor  can  I,  on  account  of  my 
present  imbecility ;  but  this  evil  slavery  in  which 
I  am  held,  causes  me  to  murmur,  a  thing  I  hate, 
because  it  implies  a  complaint  against  God,  v.  19. 
Mow  if  I  do  that  which  I  would  not,  it  is  no  more  I — 
in  this  particular  I  do  not  act  according  to  the 
dictates  of  my  enlightened  judgment,  but  it  is 
owing  to  the  strong  propelling  power  of  sin,  which 
dwells  in  my  unrenewed  heart,  v.  20.  There  may 
be  a  time,  when  a  soul  is  under  the  powerful  awak- 
enings of  the  Spirit  of  God,  while  sin  reigns  in  the 
heart,  and  the  strong  tide  of  impurity  rises  in  op- 
position to  the  flood  of  divine  truth,  that  the  peni- 
tent sinner  is  carried  away,  as  it  were,  contrary  to 
his  wishes.  Such  may  be  his  ignorance  of  the 
method  of  salvation  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  his  utter 
helplessness  in  consequence  of  the  lapsed  state  of 
his  soul,  that,  though  he  may  feel  a  strong  desire  to 
be  free  from  the  domineering  influence  of  sin,  he 
cannot  attain  to  it  instantly,  or  as  soon  as  he  would. 
To  this  state  of  mind,  it  appears  to  me,  the  Apostle 
alludes  in  this  passage.  I  find  then  a  law  of  sin  in 
my  members,  bearing  me  away,  that  when  I  would 
do  good,  this  evil  law  is  nigh,  even  in  my  nature, 
and  therefore  prevents  me,  v.  21.  So  far  from 
consenting  with  my  enlightened  mind,  to  the  tyran- 
ical  dominion  of  this  enemy,  sin,  that  /  take  delight 
in  contemplating  the  purity  and  justice  of  the  law 
of  God,  which  is  exceeding  penetrating,  extending 
even  to  the  inward  man — to  the  very  secret  desire- 


f<58  LETTER  IV. 

of  the  heart,  v.  22.  But  notwithstanding  this  de- 
light I  take  in  viewing  the  law  of  God,  and  in  anti- 
cipating my  deliverance  from  its  just  sentence,  I 
yet  see  another  law  in  my  members,  warring  against 
this  law  of  my  mind,  the  spiritual  law  of  which  my 
judgment  approves — and  bringing  me  into  captivity 
to  the  law  of  sin  in  my  members,  v.  23.  0  wretched 
man  that  I  am,  to  be  thus  captivated.  Who  shall 
deliver  me  from  this  body  of  death,  which  God's 
law  has  discovered  to  me,  v.  24.  Is  not  this  the 
language  of  every  penitent  ?  Does  he  not  groan 
under  the  heavy  burden  of  spiritual  death,  and 
"  pine  for  deliverance. "  /  thank  God,  notwith- 
standing the  law  justly  condemns  me,  I  hope  for 
deliverance  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
came  to  redeem  me  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  being 
made  a  curse  for  me.  So  then,  with  the  mind,  with 
my  "  better  judgment,"  I  serve  the  law  of  God,  I 
consent  unto  its  precepts,  that  they  are  good ;  but 
.still,  until  my  deliverance  comes,  with  my  flesh  I 
serve  the  law  of  sin,*  v.  25.  So  far  the  Apostle  il- 
lustrated the  doctrine  contained  in  the  fifth  verse. 

*  Although  I  have  paraphrased  the  25th  verse,  according 
to  the  sentiment  conveyed  in  our  translation,  yet  I  very  much 
doubt  the  accuracy  of  that  translation.  The  reader  is  desired 
seriously  to  weigh  the  following  translation  and  comment, 
which  I  borrow  from  Dr.  Macknight.  "  Do  I  myself  then  as  a 
slave,  f-erve  with  the  mind  the  law  of God,  but -with  the  Jlesh  the  law 
of  sin  ?  A§<*  av  auT©-  tyv,  &c.  Here  *§a  (ara)  is  a  particle  of 
interrogation.  This  question's  an  inference  from  what  the 
Apostle  had  said  concerning  his  being  delivered  from  the  body 
of  death,  through  Jesus  Christ.  Being  delivered,  Da  J  mysetf 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       169 

4.  But  now  we  are  delivered  from  the  law,  that 
being  dead  wherein  we  xoere  held ;  that  we  should 
serve  in  newness  of  spii'it,  and  not  in  the  oldness  of 
the  letter,  v.  6.     The  deliverance  spoken  of  in  this 

:hen  as  a  slave  serve  with,  he.  Translated  in  this  manner,  in- 
terrogatively, the  passage  contains  a  strong-  denial,  that  the 
person  spoken  of,  after  being  delivered  from  the  body  of  this 
death,  any  longer  serves,  as  formerly,  with  the  mind  only, 
Hhe  law  of  God,  and  with  the  flesh  the  law  of  sin  in  his  mem- 
bers. Whereas  translated  as  in  our  English  bible  ;  So  then 
with  the  mind  I  myself  serve  the  law  of  God,  but  with  the  fie  ah  the 
law  of  sin,  it  represents  the  delivered  person  as  still  contin- 
uing in  that  very  slavery  to  sin,  from  which  he  says  he  was 
delivered  by  God,  through  Christ,  and  utterly  overturns  the 
inference  drawn,  chap.  viii.  1.  from  what  is  said  in  this  pas- 
sage :  There  is  therefore  now  no  condemnation  to  those  in  Christ 
Jesus,  who  walk  not  according  to  the  flesh,  but  according  to  the 
spirit.  2.  For  the  law  of  the  spirit,  Sec.  But  if  those  to  whom 
there  is  no  condemnation,  walk  riot  according  to  the  flesh,  but 
according  to  the  spirit,  it  surely  cannot  be  said  of  such  in  any 
sense  that  with  the  flesh  they  serve  the  law  of  sin  ;  so  that  the 
common  translation  of  ver.  25.  is  utterly  wrong,  and  even  dan- 
gerous." In  support  of  this  translation,  Macknight  cites  to 
Matth.  xviii.  1,  saying,  (T*>  oc^x)  Who  now  is  the  greatest  in 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  ?  and  also  Mark  iv.  4.  Ti$  otga,  tfiof, 
What  manner  of  man  is  this  ?  In  both  of  these  places  it  is  man- 
ifest that  oi^sc,  (ara)  is  used  interrogatively.  The  primitive 
meaning  of  the  word  a^a,  is  a  curse*  So  that  if  its  appropri- 
ate meaning  be  insisted  on,  we  might  suppose  the  Apostle  to 
say,  It  is  a  curse  to  be  in  this  wretched  stale,  in  which  I  myself 
must  serve  the  law  of  the  Spirit  with  my  mind,  and  with  the 
flesh  the  law  of  sin  !  But  certainly  the  Apostle  did  not  design 
to  insinuate  that  he  himself,  and  all  other  Christians  were  un- 
der the  curse,  so  long  as  they  lived.  Dr.  ^/drrAvz/^'s  interpre- 
tation therefore,  appears  to  be  just  and  reasonable. 
*  See  Horn.  iii.  14. 
P 


170  LETTER  IV. 

verse,  the  Apostle  explains  more  at  large  in  the 
eighth  chapter,  particularly  from  the  first  to  the 
fourth  verse  inclusive.  There  is  therefore  now  no 
condemnation  to  them  ivho  arc  in  Christ  Jesus,  who 
.calk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  spirit,  v.  1. — 
The  man  under  the  law  is  said  to  be  in  the  flesh ; 
and  in  ch.  vii.  5.  it  is  said,  zuhen  we  were  in  the  flesh, 
the  motions  of  sins,  &c.  In  the  latter  part  of  that 
chapter,  the  Apostle  thanked  God  for  deliverance 
through  Christ.  So  here  he  says  there  is  no  con- 
demnation to  them  who  are  in  Christ ;  such  do  not 
walk  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit.  Behold  the 
-contrast !  How  great !  Before,  groaning  under  con- 
demnation :  Now,  exulting  in  deliverance.  Be- 
fore, obeying  the  motions  of  sin :  Now,  govern- 
ed by  the  law  of  the  Spirit.  It  is  not  possible 
to  describe  two  directly  opposite  characters  in 
a  more  pointed  manner. — May  not  every  exper- 
imental Christian  recognize  his  own  experience  in 
ihese  words  ?  Does  he  not  with  joy  and  gratitude 
recollect  the  happy  moment  when  he  was  made 
free  from  sin,  by  the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life 
.in  Christ  Jesus  ?  For  the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life  in 
Christ  Jesus  hath  made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin 
and  death,  v.  2.  Here  is  the  freedom,  from  the  mo- 
lions  of  sins,  which  were  by  the  law,  mentioned  in 
ch.  vii.  5.  The  law  caused  the  motions  of  sin  to 
rankle  in  the  heart,  and  thereby  shew  its  violent  op- 
position to  the  holy  law  of  God,  but  it  could  not 
deliver  from  sin.  For  what  the  law  could  not  do,  in 
that  it  was  weak  through  the  flesh,  God,  sending  his 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       171 

own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and  for  sin, 
condemned  sin  in  the  flesh,  ver.  3.  In  these  words 
the  Apostle  shews  the  superiority  of  the  gospel  dis- 
pensation over  the  law.  Such  is  the  weakness  of 
human  nature  in  its  depraved  state,  that  men  cannot 
fulfil  the  requirements  of  the  righteous  law.  To 
supply  this  defect,  and  to  remedy  this  evil,  God 
sent  his  Son,  that  sin  might  be  destroyed  ;  and  that 
the  righteousness  of  the  law  might  be  fulfilled  in  us, 
zcho  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  bat  after  the  Spirit. — 
Now  let  any  attentive  mind,  not  biased  by  preju- 
dice, nor  swayed  by  a  blind  attachment  to  a  partic- 
ular creed,  compare  what  is  here  said  in  the  eighth 
chapter,  with  what  is  said  in  the  seventh,  and  he 
will  be  convinced  that  the  Apostle  is  describing 
totally  different  characters.  You  have  no  support, 
therefore,  from  the  seventh  of  Romans,  for  you  doc- 
trine of  "  sinful  imperfection." 

5.  Having  shewn,  as  I  humbly  trust,  that  Paul  is 
misunderstood,  when  he  is  made  to  say  of  himself, 
while  under  the  influence  of  pardoning  and  sanctify- 
ing grace,  /  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin,  &c.  I  come 
to  examine  some  of  your  other  misinterpreted  texts. 
You  next  quote  a  detached  sentence  from  Phil,  iii, 
1 2.  Not  as  though  I  had  already  attained,  either 
Tcere  already  perfect  ;  and  suppose  from  this  he  had 
not  "  attained  to  sinless  perfection."  p.  83.  True, 
if  by  "  sinless  perfection"  you  mean  his  having 
completed  his  sufferings,  or  being  as  perfect  as  are 
the  saints  in  heaven.  To  all  this  perf^tion  we  do 
not  expect  any  one  to  attain  in  this  life.     That  this 


LETTER  IV. 

vms  the  perfection  to  which  he  said  he  had  not  yet  at- 
tained is  evident  from  the  context.  This  will  appear 
from  an  impartial  examination  of  the  whole  passage. 
That  I  may  know  him,  and  the  power  of  his  resur- 
rection, and  the  fellowship  of  his  sufferings,  being 
made  conformable  unto  his  death,  v.  10.  If  by  any 
means  I  may  attain  unto  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  v.  11.  Not  as  though  I  had  aleeady  attain- 
ed (unto  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  which  is  the 
complete  perfection  of  the  saints  in  heaven,)  either 
zvcre  already  perfect,  in  the  fell ow ship  f  his  suffer- 
ings, or  perfectly  conformed  unto  his  •  oath,  because 
I  have  many  tilings  to  suffer,  even  unto  crucifixion, 
before  I  am  perfect  in  sufferings,  and  before  I  can 
have  the  crown  of  martyrdom,  after  which  I  aspire, 
ft  appears  the  Apostle  felt  an  holy  ambition  of  soul 
to  imitate  his  divine  Master,  who  was  made  perfect 
through  sufferings  ;  and  thus  to  be  fully  conformed 
to  his  death,  that  he  might  have  a  share  in  the  first 
resurrection,  O  for  this  apostolic  spirit !  But  to 
this  he  had  not  yet  attained ;  and  therefore  neither 
had  he  arrived  to  that  consummate  perfection  to 
which  the  martyrs  shall  arrive  at  their  resurrection. 
Therefore  he  saith,  /  count  not  myself  to  have  ap- 
prehended ;  but  this  one  thing  I  do,  forgetting  those 
things  which  are  behind,  (not  resting  in  past  experi- 
ence or  attainments)  and  reaching  forth  unto  the 
tilings  rvhich  are  before,  (the  sufferings  in  the  cause 
of  Christ,  which  I  perceive  await  me,  and  which  I 
am  eager  K1  ';ndure)  /  press  toward  the  mark,  for 
the  prize  (the  high  dignity  of  martyrdom)  of  the  high 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       173 

calling  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus.  In  the  next  verse, 
he  strongly  asserts  the  perfection  of  his  present  at- 
tainments, as  a  christian  surrounded  with  infirmities, 
and  exposed  to  temptations ;  but  still  pressing  for- 
ward :  not  indeed  the  perfection  of  glorified  saints, 
with  which  you  unjustly  accuse  us  :  Let  us  as  many 
as  be  perfect,  be  thus  minded.  Here  the  Apostle 
speaks  of  the  same  perfection  as  he  did  Rom.  vL 
22,  "  But  now  being  made  free  from  sin,  and  be- 
come servants  to  God,  ye  have  your  fruit  unto  holi- 
ness, and  the  end  everlasting  life." 

6.  P.  83f  *'  It  is  stated,  Gal.  v.  17.  as  an  expe- 
rience common  to  all  christians,  that  in  them  the 
flesh  lusteth  against  the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit 
against  the  flesh.  The  Apostle  is  writing  to  chris- 
tians of  different  grades,  those  who  brought  forth 
thirty,  and  sixty,  and  an  hundred  fold  ;  and  yet  he 
speaks  of  them  all  as  sinfully  defective."  So 
you  assert,  but  without  a  shadow  of  proof.  Let 
any  man  candidly  examine  the  epistle  to  the  Gala- 
tians,  and  he  will  be  convinced  that  the  Apostle  ad- 
dresses them  as  a  fallen  people  ;  who  had  indeed 
begun  in  the  spirit,  but  nozv  sought  to  be  made  per- 
feet  by  the  flesh,  Chap.  iii.  3.  The  flesh,  according 
to  your  definition,  signifies,  "  The  sinful,  corrupt 
nature  which  we  bring  into  the  world  with  us." — 
According  to  this,  it  would  seem,  that  the  Galatians, 
leaving  the  pure  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  had  fallen 
into  your  system,  and  expected  to  be  made  perfect 
by  harbouring  "  indwelling  sin  j"  for  you  labour 
hard  in  your  fourth  sermon  to  shew  the  great  utility 
p  2 


;  A  LETTER  IV. 

of  sinful  imperfection,  its  happy  tendency  to  pro- 
mote humility,  penitence,  &c.  See  p.  88 — 93.  To 
proceed — The  Apostle  calls  them  foolish.  0  foolish 
Galatians,  zvho  hath  b  civ  itched  you,  that  ye  should  not 
obey  the  truth,  in.  1.  Are  ye  so  foolish?  Having 
begun  in  the  Spirit,  are  ye  now  made  perfect  by  the 
flesh?  ver.  3.  Have  ye  suffered  so  many  things  in 
vain,  if  it  be  yet  in  vain,  ver.  4.  Are  such  cutting 
reproofs  common  to  all  christians  of  every  grade, 
who  bring  forth  thirty,  sixty,  and  an  hundred  fold  ? 
Do  you  suppose  our  Lord  meant  that  those  who  re- 
ceived the  good  word  of  God,  should  bring  forth, 
some  thirty  fold  of  foolishness,  some  sixty  fold  of 
witchcraft,  and  others  an  hundredfold  of  the  works 
of  the  flesh !  Such  was  the  shameful  apostacy  of 
those  people,  that  the  apostle  told  them,  chap.  v.  4, 
Ye  are  fallen  from  grace.  We  see  therefore,  the 
reason  of  their  present  inability  to  do  the  things 
they  would.  They  had  departed  from  their  first 
faith  and  love  ;  and  having  cast  away  their  spiritual 
armour,  and  being  shorn  of  their  spiritual  strength, 
they  were  no  longer  able  to  withstand  their  ene- 
mies. They  had  in  fact  gone  back  to  the  law,  and 
were  again  under  its  curse.  It  would  seem,  there- 
fore, that  the  passage,  These  are  contrary  one  to  the 
other,  so  that  ye  cannot  do  the  things  ye  would,  ex- 
presses a  similar  sentiment  to  the  one  in  Rom.  vii. 
18.  To  will  is  present  with  me,  but  how  to  perform 
that  which  is  good,  I  find  not.  And  as  the  latter  is 
not  descriptive  of  an  experienced  father  in  Christ, 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       I  » 

so  neither  is  the  former  a  just  criterion,  by  which  to 
judge  of  the  doctrine  of  christian  perfection. 

7.  Your  next  quotation  is  from  1  Kings  viii.  AG, 
If  they  sin  against  thee,  (for  there  is  no  mail  that 
sinncth  not.)  u  If  there  be  any  man  who  has  arriv- 
ed to  a  state  of  sinless  perfection,  then  what  is 
contained  in  this  parenthesis  would  not  be  truei?'  p. 
86.  Here  again  you  beat,  the  air,  by  the  phrase 
"  sinless  perfection,"  which,  from  your  account, 
your  readers  must  suppose,  that  we  believe  means 
the  same  as  the  perfection  of  heaven.  I  would  re- 
quest the  candid,  christian  reader  to  consult  this 
text,  with  its  connexion,  fur  himself ;  and  then  say, 
if  he  can  make  any  sense  or  meaning  to  Solomon's 
prayer  for  the  Lord  to  forgive  his  people  when 
they  returned  and  made  supplication  to  him,  on  the 
supposition  that  they  unavoidably  must  continue  in 
that  very  sin  all  the  days  of  their  lives.  The  plain 
and  obvious  meaning  of  the  wise  man  is,  There  are 
none  but  are  liable  to  sin  ;  and  therefore,  if  thy 
people,  who,  with  all  others  are  thus  liable  to  sin, 
should  so  far  forget  the  dignity  of  their  character  as 
thine  elect  people,  as  to  sin  against  thee ;  and  in 
consequence  *f  their  sin,  they  should  be  carried  in- 
to captivity,  and  in  their  distress  should  they  repent 
of  their  sin,  making  supplication  unto  thee — then 
hear  thou  in  heaven,  and  forgive  their  rebellion.* — 
See  1  Kings  viii.  46 — 50. 

*  "  If  you  will  consult  the  original,  you  will  find  that  the 
word  translated  SINNETH,  is  in  the  future  tense,  which  is 
often  used  for  an  indefinite  tense  in  the  potential  mood,  because 


176  LETTER  IV. 

8.  Prov.  ix.  20.  Who  can  say,  I  have  made  my 
heart  clean.  I  am  pure  from  my  sin?  "  No  one  can 
say,  I  am  the  man,  if  the  doctrine  drawn  from  our 
text  is  true."  Granted — but  the  "  doctrine  drawn 
from"  your  text  is  not  true ;  and  therefore  the 
Apostle  Peter  could  say,  "  Seeing  ye  have  purified 
your  souls  (ye  who  have  been  redeemed  by  the  pre- 
cious blood  of  Christ,  ver.  18.)  in  obeying  the  truth 
through  the  Spirit,  unto  unfeigned  love  of  the  breth- 
ren, see  that  ye  love  one  another  with  a  pure  heart, 
(not  an  impure  heart,  full  of  pride^  &c.)  fervently, 
1  Pet.  i.  22.  St.  John  also  could  say,  "  And  every 
man  that  hath  this  hope  in  him  (the  hope  of  being 
like  Christ,  ver.  2.)  purifieth  himself  even  as  he  is 
pure,"  1  John  iii.  3.  Now,  sir,  will  you  call  Peter 
and  John  pharisees,  hypocrites,  blind,  and  "  minis- 
ters of  satan;"  and  say  that  you  have  not  the  "least 
mite  of  charity"  for  them,  because  they  congratula- 
ted their  brethren  on  their  having  attained  to  purity 
of  heart  ?  And  is  there  no  difference  between  being 
pure  in  heart,  and  being  full  of  "  indwelling  sin  ?" 
When  did  our  Lord  say,  Blessed  are  they  whose 

the  Hebrews  have  no  such  mood  or  tense.  Therefore  our 
translators  would  only  have  done  justice  to  the  original,  as 
well  as  to  the  context,  if  they  had  rendered  the  whole  clause, 
There  is  no  man  that  MIGHT  NOT  SIN,  instead  of  there  is  no 
man  that  SINNETH  NOT."  Fletcher's  Checks,  vol.  6.  p.  123, 
note.  That  a  christian  has  power  to  sin,  and  therefore  may 
sin  is  not  disputed  ;  and  that  they  have  pomer  not  to  sinf  and 
therefore  may  not  sin,  is  equally  evident.  And  that  Solomon 
meant  to  be  understood  in  this  sense,  is  manifest  from  his 
saying,  Jf  thy  people  sin,  &c. 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       i ;  7 

hearts  are  full  of  unbelief,  pride,  and  impenitence, 
and  whose  lives  are  full  of  "  sinful  imperfection  ?" 
On  the  contrary,  did  he  not  say,  Blessed  are  the 
pure  in  heart, for  they  shall  see  God?  And  among 
all  the  beatitudes  mentioned  Malt.  v.  1 — 13.  none 
are  pronounced  blessed  on  account  of  "  indwelling 
sin."  When,  therefore,  you  enumerate  the  great 
utility  of  "  heart  sin,"  do  you  not  bless  that  which 
the  Lord  abhors, — Do  not  this  abominable  thing 
which  my  soul  hattth.  If  Solomon,  in  the  above 
passage,  meant,  that  none  had  made  themselves  jmrc, 
abstract  from  the  Spirit  of  grace,  and  independent 
of  the  merits  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  he  unquestionably 
did,  he  spoke  perfectly  according  to  the  evangelical 
purity  for  which  the  scriptures  continually  plead. 
To  understand  him  otherwise,  is  to  make  him  con- 
tradict the  Psalmist  David,  his  royal  father,  who 
said,  /  am  holy,  Jesus  Christ,  in  his  sermon  on  the 
mount,  and  Peter  and  John,  in  the  passages  already 
cited  from  their  epistles. 

9.  As  to  Job,  I  would  sooner  believe  him  mis- 
taken respecting  himself,  while  groaning  under  a 
flood  of  afllic lions,  threatening  to  drown  him  in  des- 
pair ;  and  also  while  refuting  the  inconclusive  argu- 
ments of  his  mistaken  friends,  who  strove  in  vain  to 
convict  him  of  either  "indwelling,"  or  out-break- 
ing sin — I  say,  while  in  this  afflictive  situation,  I 
should  sooner  believe  he  undervalued  himself  for 
once,  when  he  said,  If  I  should  say,  I  am  perfect, 
it  would  prove  me  perverse,  than  to  disbelieve  the 
testimony    which   the   Almighty   himself  gives   of 


178  LETTER  IV. 

Job's  character,  when  he  calls  him,  A  perfect  and 
upright  man,  one  that  feareth  God  and  escheweth 
evil,  ch.  i.  8.  Not  one  that  harboureth  sin  in  his 
heart,  where  you  suppose  the  sin  of  the  believer 
principally  dwells.  But  there  is  no  necessity  of 
supposing  either  of  them  mistaken.  Job,  no  doubt, 
meant  that  he  was  not  so  perfect  as  to  be  free  from 
afflictions,  which  he  so  sensibly  felt.  His  mistaken 
friends  endeavoured  to  convince  him  that  his  afflic- 
tions were  a  mark  of  God's  displeasure,  as  he  would 
not  so  chastise  an  innocent  man.  From  these  un- 
just accusations,  Job  vindicated  himself  in  the 
most  masterly  manner,  declaring  until  I  die,  I 
will  not  let  go  mine  integrity.  From  the  whole  of 
his  arguments  in  justification  of  himself,  it  is,  unde- 
niably certain  that  he  never  meant  to  confess  him- 
self "  sinfully  imperfect,"  in  your  sense  of  the 
word.  Moreover,  it  is  expressly  said  at  the  conclu- 
sion of  the  account  of  his  losses,  In  all  this  did  not 
Job  sin  with  his  lips,  chap.  ii.  10.  It  appears  there- 
fore, that  Job  affords  no  proof  of  your  doctrine  for 
•'  sinful  imperfection." 

10.  P.  87.  1  John  i.  8.  If  we  say  that  we  have  no 
sin,  we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us. 
t;  In  view  of  these  two  last  passages,  it  seems 
strange  that  any  should  dare  to  say,  that  they  arc 
perfect  in  such  a  sense  as  to  be  sinless."  And 
a  little  below  you  say,  "  The  4th,  question  in 
the  debate  was  to  this  amount,  Do  any  in  this 
life  arrive  to  such  a  state  of  perfection  as  to 
jjve  without  sin  ?"      This  k  not  quite   correct. — 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.  •    17B 

The  question  stood  thus—Do  any  in  this  life  arrive 
to  such  a  state  of  perfection  as  to  keep  the  moral 
law.*  To  say  that  a  man  lives  without  sin,  and 
leave  it  in  this  indefinite  manner,  has  a  tendency  to 
misguide  the  hearer  5  because,  as  I  have  before 
stated,  when  a  christian  is  viewed  in  relation  to  the 
Adamic  law,  he  certainly  sins  ;  although  when  con- 

*  It  is  generally  taken  for  granted,  that  it  is  impossible  for 
christians  to  keep  the  moral  law,  or  ten  commandments.  But 
this  must  be  owing  to  inattention  to  the  subject.  What  ne- 
cessity is  there  for  one  whose  heart  is  purified  by  faith,  to 
worship  any  other  God  besides  the  God  of  heaven:  to  set  his 
affections  on  the  world,  and  thus  be  an  idolater,  or  literally  to 
bow  down  to  images  ?  What  necessity  is  there  to  violate  the 
Sabbath,  by  attending  to  secular  concerns — to  take  the  name 
of God  in  vain — to  dishonour  father  or  mother — to  kill — to  com- 
mit adultery — to  steal — to  bear  false  witness — to  covet  that 
which  is  not  our  own.  An  unconverted  man  may  refrain  from 
breaking  any  of  these  precepts  in  his  external  conduct.  And 
when  the  heart  is  changed  by  grace,  and  purified  by  the  eternal 
Spirit,  the  christian  has  an  internal  conformity  to  this  law. — 
It  would  seem,  moreover,  that  a  sanctified  christian  must  not 
only  obey  this  law,  but  he  must  do  more  than  the  letter  of 
the  law  requires — he  must  love  his  enemies,  feed  the  poorf 
clothe  the  naked,  8cc.  according  to  his  ability.  To  say  that 
never  any  one  came  up  to  these  requirements,  is  saying  more 
than  can  be  proved.  The  grace  of  God  is  sufficient  for  all 
these  things.  The  moral  law  is  a  rule  of  justice  .•  but  we  arc 
commanded  to  be  merciful. — Go,  said  Christ,  and  learn  -what 
this  meaneth,  I  will  have  mercy  and  not  sacrifice.  If  any  con- 
tend that  this  is  all  implied  in  the  moral  law,  I  have  no  dispo- 
sition  to  dispute  them  ;  because,  be  it  so  or  not,  christians 
are  Gertainly  required  to  love  their  enemies,  &c.  and  there  - 
fere  they  are  required  to  do  mote  than  the  letter  of  that  law 
enjoins. 


130  LETTER  IV. 

sidered  in  relation  to  that  under  which  the  gospel 
dispensation  places  him,  if  he  enjoy  its  privileges, 
he  does  not  commit  sin,  agreeably  to  the  language 
of  scripture,  Blessed  is  the  man  to  whom  the  Lord 
does  not  impute  sin.  The  above  passage,  viewed 
with  its  context,  will  be  found  in  perfect  conformity 
to  this  sentiment.  In  the  7th  verse  he  declared 
that  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  cleansethfrom  all  sin. 
To  this,  the  Gnostics  especially,  (who  held  that  all 
religion  consisted  in  knowledge,  and  therefore  if 
they  attained  to  abstract  knowledge,  however  vi- 
cious their  lives,  that  were  sufficient,)  might  object, 
and  say  they  did  not  stand  in  need  of  this  blood. — 
To  refute  this  error,  the  Apostle  observes,  in  ver. 
8.  If  we  say  that  we  have  no  sin,  that  is,  as  he  ex- 
presses it  in  ver.  10,  If  we  say  we  have  not  sinned,  we 
deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us.  If  we 
say  this,  that  we  never  have  so  sinned,  or  are  not  at 
the  present  in  such  a  sense  sinners  as  to  need  the 
merits  of  Christ,  we  thereby  set  aside  the  great  and 
prominent  truth  of  the  gospel  respecting  Christ's 
atoning  merits.  The  argument  of  the  Apostle  ap- 
pears to  be  this — Christ  died  for  sinners  ;  but  if  we 
were  not  sinners,  if  we  have  not  sinned,  there  was 
no  need  of  his  death.  Those  therefore  who  assert 
that  they  have  not  sinned,  do  the  same  as  to  say 
Christ  never  died  for  them.  That  the  Apostle  nev- 
er designed  to  declare  the  impossibility  of  a  deliver- 
ance from  sin  in  this  life,  is  fully  manifest  from  the 
9th  verse,  If  we  confess  our  siiis,  h&  is  faithful  and 
just  to  forgive  us  our  sins-,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all 


6N  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       18  i 

unrighteousness.  Here  the  Apostle  demolishes  your 
doctrine  of  the  necessity  of  sin  in  the  heart,  at  a 
stroke,  and  strongly  asserts  the  doctrine  of  holiness. 
If  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just  to  for- 
give us  our  sins — here  is  pardon — and  to  cleanse  us 
from  all  unrighteousness — here  is  the  perfection  for 
which  we  plead.  How  any  one  con  take  into  con- 
sideration the  leading  design  of  the  apostle,  and 
then  impartially  examine  the  context,  and  yet  sup- 
pose that  he  meant  to  support  the  doctrine  of  the 
necessary  continuance  of  sin  in  the  hearts  of  believ- 
ers all  the  days  of  their  lives,  is  difficult  to  con- 
ceive. 

11.  You  add  one  "  more  passage,''  p.  87.  "It 
is  James  iii.  2.  In  many  things  we  offend  all. — 
All  is  the  nominative  lo  the  verb  offend.  If  this 
is  true,  then  none  are  sinless.1'  Pray  sir,  have  you 
any  doubt  of  its  truth  ?  Letting  this  pass,  I  cannot 
but  remark  your  method  of  quoting  scripture,  with- 
out paying  any  attention  to  what  precedes,  or  what 
follows.  By  this  injudicious  method,  we  may  make 
the  inspired  writers  say  any  thing,  however  absurd. 
To* take  an  insulated  passage  of  scripture  in  this 
way,  without  considering  the  context,  and  without 
paying  a  proper  regard  to  the  particular  design  of 
the  writer,  is  as  unfair  as  to  judge  of  a  man's  good- 
ness from  the  length  of  his  prayers,  or  of  his  wisdom 
from  the  number  of  his  sermons.  If  you  had  at- 
tended to  these  things,  you  never  could  hava  inferred 
that  the  apostle  James  designed  to  defend  the  doc- 
trine of  "  indwelling  sin."'     My   brethren,  says  he, 


182  LETTER  IV. 

be  not  many  masters,  knowing  that  we  shall  receive 
the  greater  condemnation.  For  in  many  things  we 
offend  all,  James  iii.  1,  2.  Who  does  not  see  that 
the  Apostle  designed  to  correct,  or  to  prevent  an 
abuse  in  the  church,  of  their  being  many  masters, 
of  every  one's  dictating  for  himself  and  others  ;  and 
•  hat,  if  this  practice  were  not  avoided,  as  it  violated 
the  established  order  of  God,  we,  that  is,  those  who 
followed  that  evil  practice  should  receive  the  great- 
er condemnation.  Can  we  suppose  that  James 
meant  to  say,  that  all  christians  in  every  age  must 
in  this  manner  sin,  by  aspiring  to  be  dictators  ;  and 
as  a  consequence,  that  all  must  receive  the  greater 
condemnation  !  If  all  are  to  receive  the  greater  con- 
demnation, what  shall  become  of  the  elect,  who 
you  suppose  were  eternally  justified  in  the  mind  of 
God.  For  in  many  things,  we  who  act  thus  out  of 
our  place,  offend  all,  or  all  offend  ;  for  your  gram- 
matical criticism  was  quite  unnecessary,  as  it  does 
not  alter,  nor  mend  the  sense  any.  That  the  Apos- 
tle did  not  mean  to  pass  an  indiscriminate  censure 
upon  all  christians,  is  evident  from  what  follows  in 
ver.  2.  If  any  man  offend  not  in  word,  the  same  is 
a  perfect  man,  and  able  also  to  bridle  the  whole  body. 
Here  then  he  admits  the  possibility,  and  teaches 
the  necessity  of  a  man's  not  offending  even  in  word, 
and  who  is  therefore  a  perfect  man.  This  text, 
therefore,  is  as  little  to  your  purpose  as  the  former. 
From  what  has  been  said,  we  may  conclude  that 
your  doctrine  of  "sinful  imperfection"  has  no  sup- 
port in  the  sacred  scriptures* 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       133 

II.  1.  Having  thus  cleared  the  way,  by  rescu- 
ing the  sacred  scriptures  from  the  "  unholy  service 
(to  borrow  the  words  of  an  eminent  author)  into 
which  they  were  pressed  against  their  will,"  I  shall 
attempt  to  prove  our  doctrine  of  evangelical  per- 
fection, by  an  appeal  to  "  unequivocal"  texts  of 
holy  writ.  And  let  it  be  remembered,  that  the 
point  in  debate  is  not  whether  we  are  as  perfect  in 
this  life,  as  are  the  glorified  spirits  ;  nor  whether 
we  may  be  so  perfect  as  to  keep  the  Adamic  law ; 
but  whether  a  Christian  may  arrive  to  such  a  state 
of  perfection  as  to  keep  the  gracious  law  under 
which  the  gospel  of  Christ  places  him,  so  as,  in  this 
sense  to  be  delivered  from  sin.  It  ought  further- 
more to  be  observed,  that  no  man  since  the  intro- 
duction of  moral  evil  into  our  world,  is  under  the 
Adamic  law,  (which  was  a  law  of  works)  for  justifi- 
cation and  salvation.  Neither  is  it  a  rule  of  life  or 
of  judgment :  This  point  is  so  clear  that  it  is  needless 
to  spend  time  to  prove  it.  Taking  it  for  granted, 
therefore,  that  we  are  under  the  law  of  liberty,  es- 
tablished by  Jesus  Christ,  I  undertake  to  prove 
that  a  Christian,  whose  heart  is  thoroughly  changed 
by  the  Spirit  of  God,  does  and  must,  in  order  to  en- 
ter into  life,  keep  it. 

2.  But  Noah  found  grace  in  the  eyes  of  the  Lord, 
Noah  was  a  just  man,  and  perfect  in  his  genera- 
tion, and  Noah  walked  with  Hod,  Gen.  vi.  8,  9.  It 
may  be  asked,  Why  was  Noah  just  and  perfect  ? 
Because  he  found  grace  in  the  sight  of  God.  It 
was  not  therefore  from  obedience  to  the  Adamic, 


184  LETTER  IV. 

nor  ceremonial  law,  that  he  was  made  perfect, but  be- 
cause he  believed  God,  and  faithfully  improved  the 
light  of  the  dispensation  of  grace,  under  which  he  liv- 
ed. He  walked  with  God,  like  Enoch  before  him, 
who  walked  with  God  three  hundred  years,  and  did 
not  see  death,  for  God  translated  him  ;  and  before  his 
translation,  he  had  this  testimony  that  he  pleased 
God,  Heb.  xi.  5.  If  death  be  necessary  to  cleanse 
the  heart  from  sin,  and  if  none  can  enter  heaven 
without  being  previously  cleansed,  what  becomes 
af  Enoch,  who  did  not  see  death.  Here  is  at  least 
one  exception  to  your  doctrine — Is  not  the  prophet 
Elijah  another  ? 

3.  You  have  frequently  alluded  to  Isaiah  vi.  5. 
Wo  is  me,  &c.  If  you  had  read  on  to  the  7th  verse, 
you  would  have  discovered  the  doctrine  for  which 
we  contend.  Then  flew  one  of  the  seraphims  unto 
me,  having  a  live  coal  in  his  hand,  which  he  had 
taken  with  the  tongs  from  the  altar.  And  he  laid  it 
upon  my  mouth  and  said,  Lo  this  hath  touched  thy 
lips  ;  and  thine  iniquity  is  taken  away,  and  thy 
sin  is  purged.  Does  not  this  text  undeniably 
prove  the  doctrine  of  a  deliverance  from  sin  ? — 
Equally  in  point  are  the  words  of  the  Psalmist, 
Psa.  ciii.  12.  As  far  as  the  east  is  from  the  west,  so 
far  hath  he  removed  our  transgressions  from  us. 
Observe  that  this  is  not  spoken  in  anticipation  of 
what  shall  be  done  at  death ;  but  it  asserts  what 
had  already  been  accomplished. 

4.  Turn  we  our  attention  to  the  New-Tesjament 
writers*     What  shall  we  say  then,  shall  ice  contij 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       185 

Zfi  sin  that  grace  may  abound?  God  forbid :  how 
shall  we  that  are  dead  to  sin,  live  any  longer  there- 
in? Rom.  vi.  1,  2.  How  shall  vvc  that  are  dead  to 
sin,  consistently  with  that  character  we  are  called 
to  support,  as  the  servants  of  God,  live  any  longer 
in  sin ! 

V.  6.  Knowing  this  that  our  old  man  is  crucified 
(not  shall  be  crucified  at  death)  u-ith  him,  that  the 
body  of  sin  might  be  destroyed,  that  henceforth  we 
should  not  serve  siyi.  V.  7,  For  he  that  is  dead  is 
freed  from  sin.  V.  11.  Likewise  reckon  ye  your- 
selves  to  be  dead  indeed  unto  six,  but  alive  unto  God 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  V.  12.  Let  not 
sin  therefore  reign  in  your  mortal  bodies,  that  ye 
should  obey  it  in  the  lusts  thereof.     V.  14.  For  sin 

SHALL  NOT  HAVE  DOMINION  OVER  YOU.  No  lan- 
guage can  be  more  express,  to  denote  the  total  de- 
struction of  sin  from  the  human  heart.  "  Observe 
ihe  confidence  with  which  he  speaks" — Knowing 
his — what  ?  Why,  that  the  old  man  is  crucified,  that 
the  body  of  sin  might  be  destroyed — that  they  were 
freed  from  sin — that  they  should  reckon  themselves 
dead  to  sin — that  sin  should  not  have  dominion  over 
them*  How  diametrically  opposite  were  the  senti- 
ments of  this  holy  Apostle,  in  regard  to  deliverance 
from  sin,  and  your's,  sir,  who  so  strenuously  plead 
for  its  continuance  through  life  !  The  man  who  can 
read  the  above  passages  of  sacred  scripture,  and 
then  deny  the  necessity  and  possibility  of  the  de- 
struction of  sin  from  the  heart  in  this  life,  may,  with 
equal  propriety,  deny  every  doctrine  of  the  Bible, 
Q  2 


i36  LETTER  IV. 

Sec  also  from  vcr.  1 8 — 22,  in  the  last  of  which  it  is 
said,  But  now  being  made  free  from  sin,  and  become 
servants  to  God,  ye  have  your  fruit  unto  holiness, 
and  the  end  everlasting  life. 

5.  The  Apostle  John  bears  testimony  to  the  same 
truth,  1  John  i,  6.  If  we  say  that  we  have  fellowship 
with  him,  and  walk  in  darkness  (to  walk  in  sin  is  the 
same  as  to  walk  in  darkness)  we  lie,  and  do  not  the 
truth.  Do  you  not,  sir,  profess  to  have  fellowship 
with  Jesus  Christ  ?  and  do  you  not  also  profess  to 
live  in  sin  every  moment  ?  In  which  particular  are 
you  mistaken  ?  You  think  yu  ought  not  to  have  the 
<;  least  mite  of  charity"  for  a  Christian  who  pro- 
fesses to  be  delivered  from  sin !  How  different  the 
judgment  of  St.  John.  It  would  seem  that  he  had 
i>o  little  charity  for  those  professors  of  his  day,  who 
said  they  had  fellowship  with  God,  and  yet  walked 
in  darkness,  that  with  his  apostolic  plainness,  he 
called  them  liars.  V.  7.  But  if  we  walk  in  the  light 
as  he  is  in  the  light,  we  have  fellowship  one  with  an- 
other, and  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  his  Son  clea7iscth 
us  from  all  sin.  How  much  sin  is  there  left  when 
■  ill  is  taken  away  ?  And  it  ought  to  be  observed 
that  the  Apostle  does  not  speak  of  a  future  cleans- 
ing, but  the  blood  of  Christ  now  cleanseth.  Ch. 
:ii.  8.  He  that  commit teth  sin  is  of  the  Devil ;  for 
[he  Devil  sinneth  from  the  beginning.  If  your  doc- 
trine be  true,  that  all  must  "  always  sin  in  thought, 
word,  and  deed,"  then,  according  to  John,  all  are 
children  of  the  Devil.  Who  represents  Christ  as 
•<  vanquished"  now  ?   For  this  purpose  the  Son  of 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       187 

God  was  manifested,  that  he  might  destroy  the  works 
of  the  devil.  Will  you  say,  that  the  very  purpose  for 
which  the  Son  of  God  was  manifested,  shall  not  be 
accomplished  ?  He  came,  according  to  the  language 
of  the  Apostle  Paul,  to  redeem  us  from  all  iniquity, 
tund  to  purify  to  himself  a  peculiar  people,  zealous  of 
good  zoorks.  iT  therefore  none  are  purified,  if  none 
are  redeemed  from  all  iniquity  in  this  life,  the  be- 
nevolent design  for  which  the  Lord  Jesus  came  into 
the  world  is  not  answered.  And  is  it  not  highly  dis-* 
honourable  to  God,  to  suppose  that  the  express  <7e- 
sign  for  which  he  gave  his  Son ;  and  equally  dis- 
honourable to  the  Son  who  came  to  accomplish  the 
same  end,  to  say  that  this  desirable  end  is  not,  in 
any  instance,  obtained  '? 

6.  I  conceive  it  unnecessary  to  multiply  quota- 
tions of  scripture  on  a  point  so  amply  proved  by 
the  most  express  declarations  of  God's  word,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  disputed  with  any  prospect  of 
success.  It  seems  proper,  however,  to  notice  your 
comment  on  the  words  of  St.  John  ;  Whosoever  is 
born  of  God,  doth  not  commit  sin  ;  for  his  seed  re- 
maineth  in  him',  and  he  cannot  sin,  because  he  is  born 
of  God.  On  this  text  you  observe,  p.  97.  "If  it 
prove  any  thing,  it  proves  too  much."  True — it 
proves  too  much  for  your  system,  seeing  it  proves  in 
perfect  coincidence  with  the  preceding  texts  I  have 
quoted,  that  those  who  live  in  sin,  are  the  children 
of  the  devil,  for  he  that  is  bom  of  God  doth  not  com- 
mit sin.  Rightly  understood,  it  proves  precisely 
what  we  contend  for ;  that  those  who  are  heirs  of 
God,   cannotj  consistently  with   their  high   birtfo 


183  LETTER  IV. 

holy  calling,  and  dignified  character,  debase  them- 
selves'by  sinning.  Not  that  they  have  no  power 
to  sin  ;  but  are  under  prior,  and  stronger  obligations 
to  God,  originating  from  their  relation  to  him  as 
his  children  ;  and  consistently  with  these  obliga- 
tions, they  cannot  sin.  Like  Joseph  they  say, 
when  solicited  to  sin,  How  can  I  do  this  great  wick- 
edness, and  sin  against  God  !  You  seem  puzzled 
with  this  text — and  after  an  unsuccessful  effort  to 
remove  it  out  of  the  way  of  your  doctrine,  you  at. 
length  give  up  the  point,  and  set  your  seal  to  the 
scriptural  doctrine  for  which  we  contend.  "  The 
Apostle  means  to  say,  that  he  who  has  a  new  and 
holy  heart,  will  have  a  new  and  holy  life — and  that 
rhe  man  who  is  a  committer  of  sin,  in  distinction  of 
being  an  obedient  follower  of  Christ,  is  not  born  of 
God  :  for  if  he  was  born  of  God,  the  new  and  holy 
nature  which  abides  in  the  christian,  would  prevent 
his  living  in  sin,'1  p.  97.  Does  he  indeed  "  mean 
to  say"  this  ?.  Then  he  "  means  to  say"  directly  the 
reverse  from  what  you  "mean  to  say,"  throughout 
the  whole  of  your  fourth  sermon,  in  which  you  "  at- 
tempt" to  prove  that  all  christians  u  always  sin, 
in  word,  thought,  and  deed ;"  and  therefore  "  he 
means"  to  oppose  your  unholy  doctrine  of  "  sinful 
imperfection."  The  strong  current  of  truth  will 
carry  you  away  sometimes,  I  suppose,  however, 
where  you  would  not, 

7.  But  perhaps  you.  "mean  to  say,"  that  al- 
though the  scriptures  speak  of  being  delivered  from 
sin,  they  do  not  speak  of  our  fulfilling  the  law.  Let 
us  attend  to  their  voice,  and  we  shall  hear  them  say, 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       189 

All  the  law  is  fulfilled  in  one  word,  namely,  thou, 
shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself.  That  the  right- 
eousness of  the  law  might  be  fulfilled  in  us,  who  walk 
not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit,  Rom.  viii.  4. 
Whosoever  looketh  into  the  perfect  law  of  liberty, 
and  continueth  therein,  he  being  not  a  forgetful 
hearer,  but  a  doer  of  the  7cork,  this  man  shall  be 
blessed  in  his  deed,  Jam.  i.  25.  Blessed  are  they 
that  do  his  commandments,  that  they  may  have  a 
right  to  the  tree  of  life,  and  may  enter  in  through  the 
gates  into  the  city,  Rev.  xxii.  14.  Do  not  these 
texts  of  holy  scripture  incontestibly  prove  both  the 
necessity  and  possibility  of  having  the  righteousness 
of  the  law  fulfilled  in  us,  of  our  continuing  in  the 
law  of  liberty,  and  of  doing  the  commandments  of 
God,  that  we  may  enter  into  life  ?  No  art  of  sophis- 
try can  possibly  set  aside  such  plain  and  pointed 
testimony.  Permit  me  to  add  one  more  witness.  It 
is  John,  chap.  ii.  4.  He  that  saith,  I  know  himt 
and  keepeth  not  his  commandments,  is  a  liar,  and  the 
truth  is  not  in  him.  What  an  enemy  to  sin  was  this 
holy  apostle !  How  pointedly  does  he  rebuke  the 
Gnostics  of  his  day,  whose  doctrines  were,  (accord- 
ing to  the  opinion  of  some  respectable  Presbyterian 
ministers  in  New- York,)  like  the  sentiments  of  the 
Hopkinsians,   productive  of  infidelity.*     Hear  the 

*  To  prove  the  above  assertion,  I  will  insert  the  following 
extracts  from  some  letters  to  the  Rev.  Ezra  Stiles  Ely,  de- 
signed as  recommendations  of  his  book,  entitled,  "  Contrast 
between  Calvinism  and  Hopkinsianism." 


190  LETTER  IV. 

iame  apostle  once  more  in  chap.  iii.   22.     "  Ana 
whatsoever  we  ask  we  receive  of  him,   because  we 

'  •  The  basis  of  their  argumentation  is  the  same  with  that 
of  the  necessitarian  philosophers  in  France  and  Germany. — 
And  I  am  persuaded  that  these  profound  divines  are  preparing 
the  way  for  a  more  extensive  diffusion  of  infidel  principles, 
and  even  of  atheism  in  our  country.  I  wish  your  book  might 
be  generally  and  seriously  read,  and  the  sentiments  it  exposes 
duly  appreciated."  The  letter  from  which  this  extract  is 
taken,  is  subscribed  by  "  Samuel  S.  Smith"  d.  d.  l.  l.  d,  &c. 

— "He  has  arranged,  under  the  term  Hopkinsianism,  cer- 
tain sentiments,  which  appear  to  us,  not  only  inconsistent  with 
Uie  standards  of  the  Presbyterian  churches,  but  also  at  war 
with  the  philosophy  of  the  human  mind,  with  common  sense, 
and  with  the  word  of  the  living  God.  Such  sentiments,  :.n 
whatever  connexion  they  may  be  taught,  by  whatever  names 
they  may  be  recommended,  ought  to  be  exposed  and  reproba- 
ted in  the  most  decided  manner."  This  is  signed  by  no  less 
than  ten  ministers  of  the  Presbyterian,  and  Dutch  Reformed 
orders. 

"  Dear  Sir, 
"  By  professing  the  Christian  faith,  the  Gnostics  came  into 
the  bosom  of  the  primitive  church,  and  for  the  space  of  three 
centuries  disturbed  her  tranquility,  and  obstructed  the  pro* 
giess  of  the  gospel.  They  combined  the  oriental  science  with 
the  Platonic  system  of  "  being  in  general"  of  "abstract 
beauty  /'  *?  disinterested  love ;"  and  the  "  best  of  all  possible 
worlds;"  of  which  they  had  not  any  correct  idea  themselves; 
and  attempted  to  blend  their  heterogenious  principles  with 
revealed  religion,  and  accommodated  the  pure,  simple,  and 
sublime  doctrines  of  the  Son  of  God,  to  the  tenets  of  their 
contemptible  philosophy.  They  spoke  of  the  Most  High  with 
a  familiar  and  disgusting  irreverence ;  and  deduced  conse- 
quences from  the  premises  they  had  adopted,  which  were 
shocking  and  impious,  and  which  tended  not  only  to  render 
the  scriptures  unintelligible,  but  Christianity  itself  incredible 
and  detestable. 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       19* 

keep  his  commandments^  and  do  those  things  that  are 
pleasing  in  his  sight."     If  you  will  allow  the  testi- 

"  In  the  course  of  the  last  century,  the  system  of  the  best 
world  was  revived  and  polished  in  Germany,  with  all  the  ad- 
vantages that  genius  and  erudition  could  afford,  by  the  cele 
brated  Leibnitz  and  Baron  Wolf.  Their  mundus  optimus"  (best 
world)  "  with  its  collateral  inferences,  was  received  and  ap- 
plauded through  all  the  protestant  churches  of  continental 
Europe.  It  was  considered  as  the  test  of  true  science, 
and  the  highest  improvement  of  the  intellectual  system. — 
But  what,  is  the  result  ?  What  has  been  the  consequence  ? — 
By  that  very  philosophy,  the  public  mind  became  imper- 
ceptibly alienated  from  the  authority  of  scripture,  and 
the  simplicity  of  the  gospel ;  and  that  system  has  evidently 
co-operated  in  opening  a  passage  for  the  flood  of  infidelity, 
which,  at  this  day  has  overwhelmed  those  European  churches. 
There  is  no  new  thing  under  the  sun.  The  same  causes  will 
every  where  produce  the  same  effects.  Errors  are  insiduous 
and  subtle  ;  slow  and  silent,  at  first,  in  their  progress,  but 
sure  of  success  if  undetected.  They  always  eat  as  doth  a 
canker. 

"  To  what  philosophy,  instead  of  the  Bible,  they  have  sub- 
mitted, or  to  what  family  they  are  related,  whose  doctrines 
you  have  exhibited  in  your  contrast,  I  do  not  know" 

"  If  it  be  the  duty  of  all  the  Lord's  people  to  contend  earn- 
estly for  the  faith,  and  to  be  jealous  lest  their  minds  should  be 
corrupted  from  the  simplicity  that  is  in  Christ  ;  it  is  especial- 
ly incumbent  upon  those  who  are  set  for  the  defence  of  the 
gospel,  and  stand  as  watchmen  upon  the  walls  of  Zion,  to 
descry  approaching  danger,  and  give  a  speedy  warning ;  and 
should  an  angel  from  heaven  pi-each  any  other  gospel,  to  de- 
nounce and  resist  him."  This  is  subscribed  by  "  J  H.Liv- 
ingston," d.  d.  and  s.  t.  r. 

Infidelity  looks  with  contempt  upon  the  scriptures.  It  de- 
clares them  useless ;  ai?d  professes  to  frown  upon  them  be- 
cause they  are  contradictory.    Does  not  Hopkinsianism  su- 


192  LETTER  LV. 

mony  of  scripture  sufficient  to  put  any  controverted 
point  at  rest,  I  think  the  question  in  debate  is  fully 
decided  in  the  affirmative. 

persede  the  necessity  of  the  sacred  Scripture,  by  asserting 
that  all  things  are  produced  by  God  himself.  If  man  be  gov- 
erned by  a  secret,  irresistible  influence,  in  all  his  words  and 
actions,  according  to  the  Hopkinsian  dogmas,  the  directions 
contained  in  the  Bible  are  totally  useless.  If  the  President 
of  the  United  States  had  such  controlling  influence  over  the 
souls  and  bodies  of  all  its  citizens  as  to  turn  them,  according 
to  his  own  pleasure ;  and  if  he  determined  to  execute  his  in- 
visible authority  in  all  cases  ;  what  necessity  is  there  of 
convening  Congress,  to  establish  laws  and  regulations  ;  why 
appoint  magistrates  to  execute  them  ?  This  would  be  only  a 
sham,  a  mere  external  show  to  impose  upon  the  ignorant  mul- 
titude. And  if  Almighty  God  govern  mankind  in  this  secret 
way,  why  publish  laws  to  regulate  their  conduct  ?  Is  not  this 
imputing  a  "  holy  simulation"  to  God.  And  if  the  human 
mind  can  be  so  infatuated  by  the  illusions  of  error,  as  to  form 
such  an  idea  of  God's  sacred  character,  of  that  Being,  which 
the  scriptures  unfold,  as  the  object  of  our  worship,  it  will  re- 
quire but  one  step  more  to  leap  into  all  the  horrors  of  atheism . 
For  who  would  not  choose  to  believe  in  no  God,  rather  than  to 
acknowledge  one  who  deceives  the  creatures  he  has  made,  who 
impels  them  to  sin,  while  he  makes  them  believe  they  are 
free — who  ordains  all  the  sins  of  their  lives,  and  then  sends 
them  to  hell  for  those  identical  acts,  which  are  perfectly 
pleasing  to  him?  Who  forbids  what  he  decrees,  and  decrees 
what  he  forbids !  Who  abhors  what  he  has  decreed,  and  is 
pleased  with  what  he  abhors  /  These  absurdities  and  contra- 
dictions are  legitimate  offsprings  of  Hopkinsianism — not  re- 
motely deduced  from  its  premises,  but  explicitly  declared 
by  Mr.  Williston  himself.    See  Letter  1st  and  3d. 

"  All  the  sins  in  the  universe  were  decreed,"  p.  18.  "  The 
Supreme  Being" — is  not  fi  an  approver  of  sin,"  p.  23.  "Noth- 
ing could  be  more  abhorrent  to  his  nature,  or  farther  from  his 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       193 

8.  Do  you  ask  for  examples  ?  I  will  produce  a 
few.  "  And  Jabez  called  on  the  God  of  Israel,  say- 
ing, O  that  thou  wouldest  bless  me  indeed,  and  en- 
large my  coast,  and  that  thine  hand  might  be  with 
me,  and  that  thou  wouldest  keep  me  from  evil,  that 
it  may  not  grieve  me  !  And  God  granted  him  that 
which  he  requested,"  1  Chron.  iv.  10.  On  these 
words  we  notice,  l.That  Jabcz  prayed  that  God 
would  keep  \\\mfrom  evil.  2.  God  granted  him  his 
request.  Here  then  is  one  person  who  was  kept, 
even  in  this  life,  from  evil.  Hear  the  testimony 
which  the  Lord  gives  of  Abraham  ;  "  For  I  know 
him,  that  he  will  command  his  children,  and  his 
household  after  him,  and  they  shall  keep  the  way  of 
the  Lord,  to  do  justice  and  judgment,''9  Gen.  xviii. 
19.  God  also  testifies  respecting  Zachariah  and 
Elizabeth,  that  "  They  were  both  righteous  before 
God,  walking  in  all  the  commandments  and  ordi- 
nances of  the  Lord  blameless."  You  intimate  that 
it  is  impossible  for  anyone  to  be  blameless.  Which 
-hall  we  believe,   you  sir,  or  St.  Luke,  who  wrote 


thoughts,"  than  to  cause  the  Jews  to  make  their  children  to 
pass  through  the  fire  to  Moloch,  p.  22.  "  God  brings  every 
thing  to  pass  which  is  brought  to  pass,"  p.  1.  "  God  is  the 
efficient  cause  of  sin,"  p.  23.  "The  divine  constitution'*  se- 
cures sin  in  the  hearts  of  believers  as  long  as  they  live,  p.  90. 
"  It  is  undoubtedly  the  duty  of  all  creatures  to  be  free  from 
sin,  and  that  without  the  least  delay,"  p.  96.  It  is  our  duty 
therefore  to  oppose  the  divine  constitution!  "  The  purpose  of 
God" — "  most  evidently,  contrary  to  his  command,"  p.  7. 

May  such  contradictor}'  assertions  be  exposed  to  the  abhor- 
ring  of  all  flesh. 


194  LETTER  IV. 

by  inspiration  of  God  ?  Zacharias  and  Elizabeth 
fulfilled  what  the  Apostle  Peter  exhorted  christians 
to  do  ;  "  Wherefore,  beloved,  seeing  that  ye  look 
for  such  things,  be  diligent,  that  ye  may  be  found  of 
him  in  peace,  without  spot  and  blameless,  2  Pet.  iii. 
14.  So  also  it  is  said  of  Nathanael,  Behold  an  Is- 
raelite indeed,  in  whom  there  is  no  guile.  From 
these  examples,  it  appears  evident  that  the  precepts 
of  the  law  are  not  merely  designed  to  convict  peo- 
ple of  sin,  (although  this  is  one  end  of  them)  but. 
that  they  are  also  designed  for  christians  to  keep  ; 
and  that  it  is  possible  to  keep  them. 

9.  That  if  is  strictly  proper  to  call  christians  per- 
fect, is  abundantly  manifest  from  the  numerous  pas- 
sages of  scripture  which  speak  of  their  perfection. 
Those  who  object  to  its  propriety,  do  not  consider, 
perhaps,  that  they  thereby  impeach  the  wisdom  of 
God,  who  has  so  frequently  denominated  his  ser- 
vants perfect.  I  have  already  explained  in  what 
sense  we  are  to  understand  the  word  when  applied 
to  christians,  to  which  the  reader  is  referred.  That 
yea  may  be  convinced  of  its  propriety,  I  will  refer 
you  to  some  of  those  passages  where  it  is  used. — 
Noah  was  a  just  man  and  perfect,  Gen.  vi.  9.  Mark 
the  perfect  man,  Ps.  xxxvii.  37.  A  perfect  man 
and  upright,  &c.  Job  i.  1.  Be  ye  therefore  perfect, 
&c.  Matth.  v.  48.  Thou  wilt  keep  him  in  perfect 
peace,  Isa.  xxvi.  3.  Be  perfect,  &c.  2  Cor.  xiii. 
11.  We  speak  wisdom  to  them  that  be  perfect,  1 
Cor.  ii.  6.  That  I  may  present  every  man  perfect 
in  Christ  Jesus,  Col.  i,  28.     Let  us  as  many  as  be 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       195 

perfect  be  thus  minded,  Phil.  iii.  15.  That  ye  may 
stand  perfect  and  complete  in  the  will  of  God,  Col. 
iv.  12.  Perfect  \ove  casteth  out  fear,  John  iv.  13. 
But  whoso  keepeth  his  word,  in  him  verily  is  the 
love  of  God  perfected,  ii.  5.  Let  us  goon  to  perfec- 
tion, &c.  Heb.  vi.  1.  These  are  sufficient,  (and 
many  more  might  be  added*)  to  convince  any  im- 
partial man  that  we  arc  fully  justified  in  using  the 
phrase,  if  we  use  it  in  the  sense  which  the  holy 
scriptures  authorize. 

10.  You  will,  without  doubt,  acknowledge  that 
conviction,  justification  and  sanctification,  are  all 
the  work  of  God.  And  Moses  saith,  His  work  is 
perfect,  Deut.  xxxiii.  4.  When  therefore  a  sinner 
is  convicted,  justified  and  sanctified,  he  imperfectly 
convicted,  justified  and  sanctified;  for  all  the  zcorks 
of  God  are  perfect.  Any  thing  is  perfect,  which  an- 
swers its  end.  Thus  when  God  finished  his  work 
of  creation,  he  pronounced  it  all  very  good,  that  is, 
perfect  ;  because  each  and  every  part  was  fitted  for 
the  place  it  was  designed  to  occupy,  and  to  dis- 
charge the  duties  resulting  from  its  relative  situa- 
tion. When  souls  are  born  into  the  kingdom  of 
God,  they  are  said  to  be  created  anew  unto  good 
-work?,  which  God  ordained  that  ye  should  walk  in 
them.     To  say  therefore  that  adult  christians  do  not 

*  The  word  predestinate   occurs   but   four  times   in  all  the 

scriptures,  and  the  word  predestination  not  once Xotso  the 

word  perfection  ;  it  occurs,  with  its  derivatives,  as  frequently 
as  most  words  in  the  scripture;  and  not  seldom  in  the  very 
same  sense  in  which  we  take  it."    Checks,  vol.  6.  p.  1J. 


196  LETTER  IV. 

walk  in  good  works,  but  in  sin,  is  to  pronounce 
them  imperfect;  and  to  pronounce  them  in  this 
sense  imperfect,  is  to  say  that  God's  work  is  de- 
fective— that  he  has  not  so  wrought  believers,  as  to 
answer  the  end  of  their  new  creation.  Again  ;  the 
end  for  which  Christ  died  for  us  is.  That  he  might 
redeem  us  from  all  iniquity ,  and  purify  to  himself  a 
peculiar  people,  zealous  of  good  works.  This  then 
is  the  end,  the  manifest  design  of  God  in  the  work 
of  redemption  and  salvation.  To  accomplish  this 
end,  and  fit  man  for  this  design,  God  works  in  the 
hearts  of  those  who  believe  in  Jesus  Christ.  To 
say,  therefore,  that  obedient  believers  are  not  re- 
deemed from  all  iniquity,  and  purified  from  all  sin, 
"  properly  so  called,"  is  to  say  that  the  gracious 
design  of  God  is  frustrated,  even  towards  those  who 
are  given  to  Christ.  And  that  the  Apostle  in  the 
:ibove  passage  spoke  of  being  redeemed  from  all  in- 
iquity  in  this  life,  is  undeniably  certain,  from  his  ad- 
Ing,  a  peculiar  people  zealous  of  good  zvorks  ;  unless 
ou  absurdly  suppose  that  he  meant  they  should 
aot  be  zealous  of  good  works  until  after  death. — 
Now,  as  it  is  impious  to  insinuate  that  the  perfect 
work  of  God  is  defective,  that  his  benevolent  designs 
o  the  world  never  take  effect,  so  it  is  absurd  to  say 
'bat  believers  are  not  saved  from  sin.  If  indeed 
we  were  left  to  ourselves  in  the  work  of  salvation, 
might  well  despair  of  an  exemption  from  the 
curse  of  the  law,  and  an  emancipation  from  the 
thraldom  of- sin*  But  when  we  take  into  considera- 
tion, that  he  who  is  omnipotent  in  power  and  un- 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       197 

bounded  in  wisdom  and  goodness,  has  undertaken  to 
accomplish  this  glorious  and  desirable  work,  all  our 
fears  of  its  complete  accomplishment  are  dissipated. 
He  who  worketh  in  us  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  own 
good  pleasure,  is  fully  able  and  abundantly  willing 
to  work  in  us  perfect  faith  and  love,  perfect  humility 
and  patience,  perfect  meekness  and  temperance, 
goodness  and  forbearance,  which  are  some  of  the 
perfect  graces  which  adorn  the  soul  of  a  christian, 
Faithful  is  he  that  callcth  you,  who  also  will  do  it, 
says  Paul,   1  Thess.  v.  24. 

III.  1.  In  the  third  place  it  seems  necessary  to 
notice  some  of  the  arguments  by  which  you  at- 
tempt to  show  the  great  utility  of  sin.  I  cannot 
help,  however,  noticing  that,  in  the  catalogue  of  Old 
Testament  saints  you  have  mentioned,  Abraham  is 
brought  forward,  of  whom  you  say,  his  "  faith  was 
mixed  with  unbelief,"  which  led  him  among  others, 
in  some  instances  to  depart  from  the  living  God, 
p.  84. — whereas  Paul  saith,  Abraham  believed  God, 
and  it  was  counted  to  him  for  righteousness — And  be- 
ing not  weak  in  faith — He  staggered  not  at  the  pro- 
mise of  God  through  unbelief  but  teas  strong  in 
faith,  giving  glory  to  God,  Rom.  iv.  3,  19,  20. — 
Is  it  not  rather  bold  so  flatly  to  contradict  the  lips  of 
inspiration  !  But  you  say  these  holy  men  "  in  some 
instances  departed  from  the  living  God."  And 
suppose  it  were  granted,  you  would  gain  nothing  by 
the  concession  in  support  of  your  doctrine  ;  for  you 
'Earnestly  contend  that  every  christian  commits  sm 
R  2 


193  LETTER  IV. 

every  moment  of  his  life  !  Nay,  you  go  so  far  as  to 
say  to  your  audience,  that  they  never  were  so 
"  guilty  and  ill-deserving,  as  you  are  this  moment. 
You  have  increased  your  ill-desert  since  you  came 
into  the  house  of  God,  and  since  you  began  to  hear 
this  sermon,"  p.  99.  And  for  my  part,  I  am  dis- 
posed to  think  you  told  them  the  truth  ;  for  how  a 
man  wTith  the  Bible  before  him,  can  preach  such  un- 
scriptural  doctrine  ;  and  how  those  who  have  been 
enlightened  by  the  Spirit  of  truth,  can  embrace  it 
without  being  "  guilty"  of  shutting  their  eyes 
against  the  light  of  truth,  is  difficult  to  conceive. — 
Be  this,  however,  as  it  may,  allowing  that  many  of 
the  ancient  saints  sometimes  deviated  from  perfect 
rectitude,  it  no  more  proves  your  point,  that  every 
sincere  christian  always  departs  from  the  living  God, 
khan  it  does  that  the  sun  is  always  eclipsed,  because 
sometimes  the  moon  intercepts  its  luminous  rays.-— 
To  have  established  your  doctrine,  you  should  have 
proved  that  every  saint  "  always  sinned  in  thought, 
-vord,  and  deed."  But  this  you  never  can  do. — 
VVhat  think  you  of  Daniel,  who  was  a  man  greatly 
beloved.  No  spots,  that  I  recollect,  appear  in  his 
character! — of  Isaiah,  after  the  Angel  testified  of 
him,  thine  iniquity  is  taken  away,  and  thy  sin 
purged  ? — of  J-eremiah,  and  many  others  that  might 
be  mentioned  among  that  list  of  worthies,  whose 
holy  characters  are  exhibited  by  the  Apostle  in  the 
11  th  of  Hebrews?  Bat  from  what  different  motives 
•  loes  he  celebrate  these  saints?  He  presents  them 
as  examples  of  faith  and  patience,  of  holy  courage 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       199 

and  fortitude ;  but  you,  sir,  expose  them  for  the 
purpose  of  shewing  their  spots  of  impurity ;  and 
after  all  you  have  said,  they  will  forever  shine  in 
the  page  of  sacred  biography,  as  saints,  who,  al- 
though some  of  them  at  "  some  times"  suffered  an 
eclipse  of  their  luminous  faith  and  hope,  were,  by 
far  the  greatest  number  of  their  days,  eminent  ex- 
amples of  the  most  undeviating  constancy  in  the 
service  of  God.  What  think  you  also  of  John  the 
Baptist  ?  Did  he  ever  tarnish  the  glory  of  his  char- 
acter, as  one  of  the  greatest  of  Prophets  ?  Of  James 
and  John  ;  of  Paul  after  his  extraordinary  conver- 
sion ?  Have  we  any  account  that  they  "  always  ran 
away  from  God  ?"  And  although  Peter  sinned  by 
denying  his  Lord,  and  afterward  by  dissimulation,  I 
think  it  would  be  difficult  to  prove  that  he  always 
sinned.  You  have  no  authority  therefore  from  the 
example  of  either  the  Old  or  New  Testament  saints 
to  conclude  that  every  one  must  live  in  sin  all  his 
life.  It  ought  to  be  carefully  noted  that  this  is  the 
point  you  are  to  prove.  The  moment  you  acknow- 
ledge that  a  christian  may  live  a  day  without  sin 
ning,  you  give  up  the  point.  For  the  same  gracious 
power  which  keeps  a  soul  one  day  is  able  to  keep  it 
a  year,  or  twenty  years.  We  acknowledge  that 
some  of  the  saints  sometimes  sinned  ;  and  that  all, 
the  best  not  excepted.,  are  liable  to  sin.  Liability, 
however,  does  not  imply  necessity. 

2.  P.  38.  "  The  present  plan  is  calculated  to 
make  the  saints  eternally  more  penitent,  humble, 
thankful,  and  every  way  meet  for  their  heavenly  in- 


200  LETTER  IV. 

heritance."*  P.  89.  "  There  are  two  things  which 
are  calculated  to  make  creatures  feel  the  reverse  of 
pride  and  self-sufficiency  ;  or  in  other  words,  to  feel 
humble  ;"  and  a  few  lines  above  you  seem  to  think 
humility  is  greatly  promoted  by  this  plan  which  in- 
sures sin  in  the  hearts  of  saints  ;  and  in  page  102, 
you  think  he  makes  a  "  thousand  deviations," 
"  especially  as  it  respects  the  exercises  of  his 
heart."  Is  it  not  very  extraordinary  that  pride 
should  promote  humility — that  hardness  of  heart, 
should  promote  penitence — that  self-sufficiency  should 
make  us  feel  our  dependence — that  unbelief  should 
strengthen  faith — and  that  icorldly-mindedncss- 
should  promote  spiritual-mindedncss  ?  Is  it  not 
much  more  scriptural  and  rational  to  conclude  that, 
when  grace  has  effected  a  "  radical  change"  in 
the  heart,  by  which  pride,  anger,  &c.  is  extermina- 
ted, and  the  heart  is  filled  with  perfect  love,  that 
the  christian  will  be  more  likely  to  be  humble,  meek. 
and  constant  in  faith,  than  if  his  heart  were  filled 
with  pride,  anger,  &c  ?     To  shew  the  absurdity  of 

*  P.  111.  "The  penitent  sinner  goes  to  Christ  to  be  saved 
from  all  his  sins  ;  to  be  redeemed  from  all  iniquity ;  and 
Christ  undertakes  as  a  Saviour  and  Redeemer  to  perfect  this 
most  desirable  deliverance."  Does  he  indeed  ?  And  yet  nev- 
er accomplishes  what  he  thus  undertakes !  At  least  not  in 
this  life.  And  why  }  Not  because  the  penitent  sinner  is  not 
faithful.  This,  according-  to  your  doctrine,  has  nothing  to  do 
in  the  case.  Is  it  then  for  want  of  power  vr  goodness  ?  Is  it 
not  a  mark  of  folly  or  imbecility  to  undertake  what  cannot  be 
accomplished  ?  And  does  not  your  doctrine  attribute  - 
weakness  to  Jesus  Christ  ? 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.      201 

your  unscriptural  ideas  on  this  subject,  I  will  re- 
duce them  to  a  sylogistical  form.  A  man  must  be 
penitent,  humble  and  meek  to  be  fit  for  heaven  ;  but 
pride,  anger,  and  hardness  of  heart,  promotes  hu- 
mility, meekness,  and  penitence  ;  therefore  a  man 
must  be  proud,  angry,  and  hard-hearted,  to  be  fitted 
for  heaven  !  On  the  same  mode  of  reasoning  which 
you  have  adopted,  it  might  be  proved  that  unclcan- 
ness  promotes  cleanness,  that  debauchery  promotes 
chastity !  Was  not  then  David  more  "meetencd  for5.1 
heaven  in  the  bed  of  adultery  than  whilst  compos- 
ing his  penitential  Psalms  ?  O  Christianity !  how 
is  thy  immaculate  purity  tarnished,  and  thy  superla- 
tive excellence  clouded  by  the  systems  of  errors 
with  which  thou  art  shrouded,  by  thy  mistaken 
friends  ! 

3.  In  page  89,  you  suppose  that  the  "  spiritual 
Canaanites"  are  a  means  of  shewing  us  our  sinful- 
ness, and  of  keeping  "  pride  from  entering  heav- 
en." What  are  "  spiritual  Canaanites  '?"  Is  not 
pride  one  of  them  ?  Must  a  man  harbour  pride  for 
the  purpose  of  expelling  pride  ?  Are  not  anger, 
blindness  of  mind,  and  self-will  some  of  them  ?  And 
will  anger  expel  anger,  blindness  of  mind  make  one 
see  himself,  and  self-will  make  a  person  yielding  ? — 
If  these  evil  passions  will  work  their  own  ruin,  why 
do  you  suppose  death  necessary  to  perfect  the 
work  ?  Is  not  this  substituting  another  name  by 
which  we  can  be  saved,  in  the  room  of  the  name  of 
Jesus  ?  If  pride  will  destroy  pride,  and  self-will 
destroy  stubbornness,  then  there  is  no  necessity  for 


202  LETTER  IV. 

the  Holy  Spirit  to  apply  the  merits  of  Christ 
to  effect  their  destruction  !  To  what  a  mon- 
strous absurdity  does  error  conduct  us  !  Christ 
said,  Learn  of  me,  for  I  am  meek  and  lowly  of  heart. 
But  according  to  your  doctrine,  we  are  to  learn  of 
pride  to  be  humble,  and  of  anger  to  be  meek.  The 
Apostle  saith,  In  thy  light  we  see  light.  You  say 
that  the  "  spiritual  Canaanites"  will  give  "  a  more 
exquisite  sense  of  their  sinfulness;"  but  it  was  a 
view  of  Jehovah  which  caused  Isaiah  to  cry  out,  / 
am  a  man  of  unclean  lips,  and  which  made  Job  ab- 
hor himself  and  repent  in  dust  and  ashes. — And  it 
was  a  sight  of  Jesus  Christ  which  made  Peter  say, 
with  deep  humiliation,  Depart  from  me,  for  I  am  a 
sinful  man,  O  Lord.  We  know  that  the  less  grace 
a  man  has,  the  more  blind,  self-conceited,  and  arro- 
gant he  is  ;  and  nothing  short  of  the  energies  of  the 
eternal  Spirit  applying  the  merits  of  Christ,  can 
exterminate  these  "  spiritual  Canaanites"  from  the 
heart.  You  might  as  well  teach  your  gardener  to 
take  special  care  not  to  pluck  up  the  noxious  weeds 
by  the  roots,  but  only  lop  off  the  branches,  that 
your  garden  might  be  clear  of  weeds,  as  to  tell  be- 
lievers that  the  root  of  sin  must  remain,  especially 
as  it  respects  the  exercises  of  the  heart,  that  there- 
by humility  and  meekuess  may  be  promoted.  The 
mean  of  humility,  according  to  your  doctrine,  is 
pride  ;  and  from  this  pride  the  believer  cannot  be 
delivered  in  this  life.  Your  mean,  sir,  defeats  the 
end.  Is  not  pride  and  humility  directly  opposite  ? 
And  can  a  man  be  humble,  and  proud  at  the  same 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.      <203 


TipN. 


time  ?  Can  a  man  attain  to  humility  by  a  vice 
which  is  totally  subversive  of  it.  Exquisite  logic  ! 
3.  Moreover,  two  parts  of  your  system  oppose 
each  other,  therefore  they  must  ultimately  destroy 
one  another.  The  new  birth,  you  very  justly  ob- 
serve, is  a  "  radical  change."  I  have  before  ob- 
served that  the  word  radical,  comes  from  the  Latin, 
radix — root.  The  new  birth  therefore,  according  to 
your  definition  of  it,  signifies  a  change  at  the  root, 
seat,  or  foundation  of  the  affections  ;  and  yet  in 
your  defence  of  sin,  you  say,  p.  102,  that  the  be- 
liever, one  who  has  experienced  this  change  at  the 
root,  "  sees  a  thousand  deviations  from  that  perfect 
rule  given  in  the  scriptures,  especially  as  it  respects 
the  heart."  The  heart  then,  it  seems,  which  has 
been  radically  changed  by  the  spirit  of  holiness,  is 
nevertheless,  the  root,  seat,  or  foundation  of  the  nox- 
ious seeds  of  sin,  from  whence  sprout  pride,  hard- 
ness, unbelief,  and  blindness  of  mind,  Szc.  How  di- 
ametrically opposite  is  this  doctrine  of  yours  from 
our  Lord's,  Luke  vi.  45.  "  A  good  man,  out  of  the 
good  treasure  of  his  heart,  bringeth  forth  that  whicli 
is  good  ;  and  an  evil  man  out  of  the  evil  treasure  of 
his  heart,  bringeth  forth  that  which  is  evil."  If  you 
should  be  disposed  to  preach  a  sermon  on  these 
words,  you  might  prove  the  doctrine  contained  in 
them  by  a  parallel  text  in  Matt.  vii.  1G — 20,  in  one 
of  which  verses  it  is  said,  in  direct  opposition  to 
your  doctrine,  "  A  good  tree  cannot  bring  forth  evil 
fruit."  But  it  is  not  very  surprising,  that  a  man  who 
can  assert  that  air  things,  goo d  and  bad,  proceed 


<204  LETTER  TV. 

from  God,  as  their  efficient  cause,  should  also,  in  the 
profundity  of  his  wisdom,  or  in  the  vortex  of  confu- 
sion, assert  that  an  heart  radically  good  should  be 
productive  of  actions  essentially  bad.  But  Jeremi- 
ah will  contradict  the  former  sentiment,  as  pointed- 
ly as  Jesus  Christ  has  done  the  latter  in  the  above 
texts. — Out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Most  High  pro- 
ceedeth  not  evil  and  good,  Lam.  iii.  38. 

4.  But  lest  my  readers  should  think  I  misrepre- 
sent you,  I  will  here  quote  some  lines  you  Lave 
written  in  p.  90  and  91.  After  endeavouring  to 
shew  the  benefit  of  sin  to  believers,  you  add, — 
"  They  cannot  but  admire  the  patience  which  bears 
with  so  much  pride,  self-seeking,  worldly-minded- 
ness,  impenitence,  hardness  of  heart,  unbelief,  in- 
gratitude and  disobedience,  as  have  been  found  in 
them,  since  they  have  been  by  his  grace,  called  out 
of  darkness  into  marvellous  light!"  And  let  it  be 
observed  that  you  plead  for  these  evil  fruits,  because 
they  are  designed  of  God  to  promote  the  opposite 
virtues.  O  what  dangerous  sentiments  you  have 
advanced.  Let  us  do  evil  that  good  may  come.  Let 
us  be  proud,  may  all  who  believe  your  doctrine  say, 
hat  humility  may  come.  And  if  indulging  internal 
evils  is  so  beneficial,  why  not  external  ones  ?  Why 
may  not  the  drunkard  say,  I  will  be  drunk  that  so- 
briety may  be  promoted  ?  and  so  of  all  other  vices. 
These  are  legitimate  inferences  from  your  doctrine. 
Permit  me,  dear  sir,  to  throw  myself  at  your  feet  for 
a  moment,  and  beg  of  you  for  virtue's  sake,  for  the 
sake  of  honesty  and  chastity,  for  the  sake  of  humil- 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.      231 

ky  and  meekness,  and  above  all  for  Christ's  sake, 
who  came  to  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil,  not 
to  preach  such  doctrine  any  more,  lest  some  take 
the  liberty  it  gives  them,  and  undertake  to  exem- 
plify in  their  lives,  what  they  profess  to  believe  in 
their  hearts.  Review  the  subject  for  a  moment^ 
and  see  if  there  be  not  a  possibility  of  your  being 
mistaken  in  your  view  of  things.  I  hope  you  are 
not  too  tenacious  to  recant,  if  you  can  be  con- 
vinced oi  your  error.  May  the  Father  of  lights 
pity  our  frailties,  and  forgive  our  errors. 

5.  P.  91.  "  The  strength  of  indwelling  sin  in  the 
saints,  makes  way  for  richer  displays  of  the  power 
of  Christ." — and  also,  M  of  the  truth  and  fait hfulnscs 
of  the  Redeemer."  This  flimsy  argument  has  de- 
ceived thousands.  A  simple  illustration  will  shew 
its  fallacy.  A  sick  man  sends  for  a  physician,  who 
informs  his  patient,  that  his  disorder  is  dangerous  ; 
u  and  although  I  do  not  like,"  says  he,  "  to  deal  in 
technical  terms  to  plain  people  who  do  not  under- 
stand them,  I  must  tell  you  that  a  radical  cure  must 
be  effected.  This  Ls  done  the  moment  my  medi- 
cine is  taken.  You  will  grow  no  better  '  by  de- 
grees,' even  should  you  be  forty-nine  degrees  near- 
er perfect  health  than  you  now  are,  (see  p.  40,  of 
your  book)  but  will  remain  totally  sick  '  up  to  the 
moment'  of  your  '  radical  change,'  which  will 
be  the  moment  you  swallow  my  sovereign  dose. — 
Although  you  will  be  '  radically  changed'  from 
total  sickness  to  perfect  health,  yet  your  disease  is 
so  seated,  and  so  inveterate  withal,  that  I  cannot  en- 

3 


206  LETTER  IV. 

tirely  cure  you  without  endangering  your  life !  Do 
not  be  surprised  at  what  I  say — you  must  know 
that  my  power,  truth,  and  faithfulness  will  not  be 
displayed  in  your  restoration  to  health,  unless  I 
continually  administer  my  emetics  and  cordials.  If 
you  should  be  restored  to  perfect  health,  you  would 
not  be  thankful  to  me  for  my  skill,  power,  and  good- 
ness, as  a  physician  ;  therefore  to  keep  up  a  per- 
petual rememberance  in  your  mind  of  my  faithful- 
ness and  truth,  I  shall  leave  you  to  grapple  with 
a  violent  pain  in  your  head,  and  a  little  mortifica- 
tion upon  your  heart,  which,  although  '  radically' 
cured,  is  yet  the  root  or  seat  of  your  disorder,  and 
this  will  preserve  some  spots  upon  your  face  as 
symptoms  of  your  disease.  This  pain  in  your  head 
will  promote  ease,  and  the  mortification  at  the 
heart  will  gradually  promote  soundness  !  I  have, 
however,  an  old  enemy  which  my  medicines  are  in- 
tended to  guard  you  against,  who  will  by  and  by  put 
a  final  termination  to  your  complaint.  Although  an 
enemy,  1  use  him  as  a  faithful  servant  to  aid  me  in 
difficult  cases — he  is  called  death."  At  this  word 
methinks  the  poor  patient  turns  pale,  and  with  trem- 
bling lips,  says,  "  Through  the  violence  of  my  dis- 
order I  may  not  think  accurately,  but  I  thought  you 
were  to  perform  a  radical  cure.  If  you  would  be  so 
kind  as  to  fulfil  this  promise,  I  should  have  the  ful- 
lest confidence  in  your  truth  and  faithfulness,  which, 
according  to  my  judgment,  are  displayed  in  fulfil- 
ling one's  promise.  But  perhaps,  as  you  are  but  a 
man,  you  lack  power — I  therefore  will  try  to  excuse 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.      207 

you,  especially  as  my  head  is  considerably  affected, 
I  may  not  reason  accurately."  "  That  is  it,"  re- 
joins the  physician — "  your  disorder  unfits  you  for 
reasoning.  My  truth  and  faithfulness  are  not  ac- 
complished so  much  in  the  fulfilment  of  my  promise, 
as  in  the  exercise  of  your  patience,  (although  you 
must,  among  other  evils,  have  much  impatience)  un- 
der a  disease  which  you  must  be  content  to  bear 
these  twenty  years,  for  aught  I  know.  As  to  my 
power,  it  is  fully  adequate  to  all  I  will ;  and  my  pill 
is  to  use  it  in  checking  your  disorder  as  it  rages, 
and  not  in  removing  its  caused  "  But  if  death  is  to 
rid  me  of  these  tremendous  pains,  why  not  let  my 
disorder  rage,  that  I  may  the  sooner  be  delivered 
from  suffering  ?"  "  O,  I  must  have  an  opportunity 
of  shewing  my  skill  in  effecting  radical  and  install* 
taneous  cures,  by  keeping  my  patients  a  long  timef 
progressing  toward  a  final  cure.  True,  there  are 
some  who  have  taken  my  remedies,  who  pretend  to 
be  restored  to  perfect  health.  But  they  are  de- 
ceived. They  were  never  sensible  of  their  disease  : 
if  they  had  been,  they  would  have  known  it  impos- 
sible to  have  it  perfectly  removed  while  they  live  ; 
besides,  they  reproach  my  character,  by  saying  I 
am  able  and  willing  to  restore  to  sound  health.  I 
have,  however,  an  old  friend  who  pleads  my  cause 
against  these  deluded  souls.  He  asserts  that  I 
have  effected  radical  cures  in  an  instant ;  but  you 
must  know  that  he  asserts  this,  while  he  is  proving 
that  my  patients  were  once  totally  sick,  in  opposi- 
tion to  some  ignoramuses,  who  say  that  before  a  map 


iOfc  LETTER  IV. 

dies  there  is  some  life.  But  as  these  same  ignorant 
enthusiasts  teach  that,  inasmuch  as  I  am  a  perfect 
physician,  J  perform  perfect  cures,  this  old  counsel- 
lor of  mine  comes  forward,  and  roundly  asserts  that 
all  my  patients  remain  radically  sick  while  they 
live,  if  I  rightly  understand  him,  when  he  says,  they 
have  much  sickness,  '  especially  as  it  respects  the 
exercises  of  the  heart.'  Although  there  is  a  mani- 
fest contradiction  in  asserting  that  a  man  is  radical- 
ly changed  from  sickness  to  health,  and  yet  that, 
c  especially  as  it  respects  the  heart,'  there  is  much 
sickness  remaining,  you  must  not,  on  that  account, 
question  the  truth  of  these  contradictory  proposi- 
tions, because  that  would  strengthen  the  hands  of 
his  antagonists,  who  are  continually  teazing  him 
about  such  jarring  assertions.  You  must  believe 
them  both  true,  because  they  are  brought  to  oppose 
opposite  errors.  The  one  error  is,  that  until  a  man 
is  totally  dead  there  is  some  life  remaining  ;  the 
other  is,  that  my  skill,  truth,  and  faithfulness  are 
more  fully  displayed  in  accomplishing  my  promise 
and  restoring  to  perfect  health,  than  it  is  in  keeping 
my  patients  alive  for  a  long  time  exercised  under 
pains  and  mortifications.  These  two  errors  are  so 
perfectly  hateful  to  me,  that  I  think  if  my  wise  coun- 
sellor can  but  confute  them,  he  may  be  allowed  to 
contradict  himself  a  little."  I  leave  the  reader  to 
make  the  application  of  this  simile  for  himself;  i^ 
being  evident  that  the  truth  and  faithfulness  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  is  more  perfectly  displayed  in  perfectly 
delivering   his  people  from   sin,  according  to  his 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       209 

promise  ;  and  his  power  is  more  fully  demonstrated 
in  preserving  them  from  sin  and  all  their  other 
deadly  foes,  than  it  would  be  in  keeping  u  sin  in 
their  hearts,  by  a  positive,  creative  influence.'''* 

6.  The  inference  from  what  has  been  said  is, 
that  they  who  live  in  the  habitual  commission  of 
sin,  as  you  think  the  best  of  Christians  do,  and  at 
the  same  time  profess  to  be  Christians,  are  deceiv- 
ing themselves.  "  We  are  taught  by  the  current  of 
scripture,"  that  he  who  committeth  sin  is  of  the 
devil :  for  the  devil  sinneth  from  the  beginning.-— 
"  From  the  scriptures  we  also  learn"  that  the  saints 
arc  holy,  that  they  being  made  free  from  sin,  and 
become  servants  to  God,  have  their  fruit  unto  holi- 
ness, and  the  end  everlasting  life.  "  The  Apostle 
John  thinks  that  this  is  sufficient  proof  against  the 
genuineness  of  any  man's  religion,"  for  them  to 
say  that  they  every  moment  depart  from  the  living 
God,  when  he  said,  He  thai  doth  righteousness  is 
righteous  even  as  he  is  righteous — He  that  is  bom  of 
God  doth  not  commit  sin.  "  We  may  therefore, 
with  the  bible  before  us,  as  easily  perceive"  that  if 
a  man  is  not  mistaken  when  he  professes  to  be  full 
of  indwelling  sin,  he  is  "  assuredly  in  the  gall  of  bit- 
terness and  bond  of  iniquity,"  -;  as  Peter  perceived 
that  this  was  the  state  of  Simon  the  sorcerer,  when 
he  sought  by  money  to  purchase  the  power  of  giving 
the  Holy  Ghost."  "  We  cannot,  we  believe  we 
ought  not  to  entertain  the  least  mite  of  charity  for 
that  man,  (however  apparently  pious  he  is,)  who 
shall  say,  that  for  years,  or  months,  or  weeks,  or 


210  LETTER  IV. 

days,  he  lias  lived  in  such  an"  unholy  manner,  that 
he  discovers  his  heart  full  of  indwelling  sin,  and 
from  which  unholy  fountain  issues  the  streams  of 
pride,  vain-glory,  and  impenitence,  &c.  which  you 
say  dwells  in  the  hearts  of  all  believers,  and  are 
productive  of  humility,  lowliness,  and  penitence  !  I 
speak  not  these  things  from  any  enmity  to  those  per- 
sons who  espouse  the  doctrines  I  oppose,  "  but 
from  a  regard  to  truth,  and  a  tender  concern  for 
the  salvation  of  that  generation  who  fancy  them- 
selves the  elect  of  God,  and  who  according  to  their 
own  confession,  are  under  the  power  of  sin  every 
moment ;  and  therefore  however  "  pure"  they  may 
be  "  in  their  own  eyes,"  is  not  washed  from  their 
filthiness.     See  your  fourth  Sermon,  p.  93,  94. 

7.  The  scriptures  say,  The  soul  that  sinneth  shall 
die.  Now,  according  to  your  doctrine,  the  best  of 
men  sin  every  moment.  Those  therefore  who  pro- 
fess the  religion  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  think  they 
are  in  the  way  to  life,  and  who  nevertheless  live  in 
-in,  are  deceiving  themselves,  for  He  that  commit- 
Hit  sin  is  of  the  devil — If  ye  die  in  your  sins,  where 
I  am  ye  cannot  come.  What  more  can  be  implied 
in  being  in  the  gall  of  bitterness  and  bond  of  iniqui- 
';/.  than  being  under  the  perpetual  influence  of  in- 
dwelling sin,  and  "  always  sinning  in  deed,  word 
and  thought  V'  If  therefore  the  professions  of  such 
persons  are  true  and  honest,  if  they  are  what  they 
profess  to  be,  then  are  they  servants  to  the  devil,  and 
in  the  high  road  to  destruction  !  I  do  not  say,  sir, 
that  tltis  is  really  the  case  with  all  those  who  pro.- 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.       211 

fess  faith  in  your  unholy  doctrine.  It  is  possible 
many  of  them  are  deceived  by  the  illusions  of  error ; 
and  it  is  also  possible  for  the  understanding  to  be 
wrongly  informed,  while  the  heart  is  seasoned  with 
grace. 

8.  P.  96.  "  When  God  commands  us  to  be  per- 
fect, we  are  to  understand  the  word  in  the  most  un- 
limited meaning."  Is  not  this  a  mistake  ?  I  thought 
God  alone  is  unlimitedly  perfect.  But  do  you  sup- 
pose God  commands  us  to  be  as  completely  perfect 
as  himself:  "  Because  it  is  the  duty  of  all  creatures 
to  be  free  from  sin,  and  that  without  the  least  de- 
lay/5 And  does  it  follow,  that,  because  it  is  our 
duty  to  be  free  from  sin,  we  must  also  be  omnipo- 
tent, infinite  in  wisdom,  power  and  goodness,  as 
well  as  omniscient.  A  wondrous  argument !  It  is, 
you  say,  our  duty  to  be  free  from  sin  without  delay, 
and  yet  no  man  can  in  this  life.  The  wise  consti- 
tution of  God,  if  we  believe  your  doctrine,  insures 
sin  in  the  hearts  and  lives  of  all  believers  so  long  as 
they  live.  This  then  is  God's  appointment.  Is  it 
our  duty  to  oppose  this  appointment  of  God  ?  So 
you  assert — It  is  our  duty  to  be  free  from  sin,  al- 
though God  has  appointed  otherwise  !  The  line  of 
duty  then  is  not  marked  by  God's  appointment.- — 
Such  inconsistencies  are,  I  believe,  peculiar  to  your 
*  New  Divinity." 

9.  P.  100.  "  As  they  are  always  sinning  in  deed, 
word  and  thought."  P.  101.  "  Sinning  is  not  the 
whole  which  a  just  man  doeth  ;  he  also  docth  good, 
and  is   possessed  of  a  good  heart."     I  should  be 


212  LETTER  V. 

glad  to  know  if  "  always,"  and  "  deed,  word  and 
thought"  do  not  comprehend  all  one's  time,  and  all 
one's  employment  ?  "  Thought,  word  and  deed," 
seem  to  include  the  whole  of  a  man's  work ;  and 
according  to  Johnsons  dictionary,  the  word  "  al- 
ways" signifies,  "  perpetually,  constantly,"  which 
includes  the  whole  of  a  man's  time.  This  being  the 
case,  pray  be  so  kind  as  to  inform  us  in  what  space 
of  time,  which  is  perpetually  employed  in  sinning  in 
"  deed,  word  and  thought,"  the  same  identical  man 
'•  does  good."  And  if  he  "  is  possessed  of  a  good 
heart,"  how  is  it  that  he  sins  "  always,"  "  espe- 
cially as  it  respects  the  exercises  of  his  heart  /"' 
But  I  would  apologize  for  these  strange  inconsisten- 
cies. You  were  fearful,  perhaps,  that  some  might 
take  an  advantage  from  the  liberty  which  your  doc- 
trine gave  them,  when  you  told  them  a  believer 
"  always  sins  ,"  and  lest  they  might  act  according 
to  such  licence,  and  be  consistent  in  faith  and  prac- 
tice, you  wished  to  guard  them  and  yourself  against 
such  pernicious  consequences,  and  so  told  them 
their  hearts  were  good,  and  that  accordingly  they 
must  do  good,  at  least  "  sometimes." 

I  hope  your  hearers  and  readers  will  take  this 
part  of  your  doctrine,  and  exemplify  it  in  their  lives, 
by  doing  good,  even  by  keeping  the  commandments 
of  God. 

10.  The  candid  Christian  reader  is  left  to  deter- 
mine for  himself,  which  doctrine  is  most  congruous 
with  scripture  and  reason,  That  which  teaches  the 
necessity  of  sin  in  the  hearts  and  lives  of  all  believ- 


ON  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.      213 

ers  during  life,  or  that  which  represents  Christ  as 
the  great  purifier  of  the  heart — That  which  limits 
the  skill,  truth  and  faithfulness  of  the  divine  Physi- 
cian, or  that  which  exhibits  him  as  a  perfect  Sav- 
iour, who  saves  to  the  uttermost  all  that  come  unto 
God  by  him,  and  delivers  those  who  through  fear  of 
death  were  all  their  life  time  subject  to  bondage. 

That  we  may  heartily  embrace,  and  fully  expe- 
rience the  height  and  depth  of  tlmtperfect  love  which 
casteth  out  fear,  even  the  fear  of  offending  a  friend 
by  speaking  the  truth  in  love,  is,  dear  sir,  the  ar- 
dent prayer  of,  Yours.  &c. 

N.  BANGS. 
Rev.  S.  Williston,  Durham,  JV\  F, 
Rhinebeck;  May  10,  1815. 


LETTER  V 


OX    THE    POSSIBILITY    OF    FALLING     FROM      GRACF. 


Rev,  Sir, 

-I  HE  several  branches  of  Gospel  truth,  mutually 
depend  upon  each  other,  like  the  different  members 
of  the  human  body  :  God  alone  is  absolutely  inde- 
pendent, all  creatures  being  dependent  on  him  for 
their  existence,  and  for  all  the  temporal  and  spirit- 
ual blessings  which  they  enjoy.  He  also  is  the 
fountain  of  all  truth,  from  whom  the  stream  of 
revelation  issues.  To  this  revelation  therefore,  we 
must  have  recourse  to  decide  all  subjects  of  con- 
troversy. 

I.  1.  In  regard  to  the  possibility  of  a  saint's  so 
falling  from  grace  as  to  perish  everlastingly,  many 
arguments  might  be  deduced  from  the  attributes  of 
God,  the  moral  agency,  and  consequent  responsi- 
bility of  Christians  ;  from  the  analogy  of  things,  as 
well  as  the  dangerous  tendency  of  a  contrary  sen- 
timent, to  shew  the  danger  of  apostatizing  from  the 
faith :  but  on  a  point  so  easily  proved  from  the  sa- 
cred scriptures,  I  shall  confine  myself  principally  to 
them.     In  the  first  place,  however,  it  seems  neces* 


216  LETTER  V. 

sary  to  examine  some  of  the  arguments  with  which 
you  endeavour  to  .  support  the  opposite  doctrine. 
Your  first  attempt  to  prove,  that  a  believer  "  can- 
not fall  away  so  as  to  fail  of  eternal  blessedness," 
is  by  "  attending  to  the  nature  of  the  covenant  of 
redemption,  which  subsists  between  the  persons  of 
the  God-head,  concerning  the  redemption  of  men." 
p.  105. 

2.  It  seems  important  to  enquire,  whether  or  not 
such  a  covenant  of  redemption  as  you  have  repre- 
sented, and  which  you  suppose  was  made  "  Be- 
tween the  persons  of  the  Godhead,"  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world,  be  scriptural.  That  we 
have  no  account  of  such  a  covenant,  which  is  limit- 
ed in  its  provisions  to  one  part  of  mankind  only,  is 
manifest,  I  think,  from  those  passages  of  scripture 
which  speak  upon  this  subject.  However,  as  you 
have  quoted  some  texts  to  prove  this  part  of  your 
system,  it  seems  proper  to  notice  them.  The  first 
you  appeal  to  is  Psalm  ex.  3.  Thy  people  shall  be 
willing  in  the  day  of  thy  power.  It  is  truly  surpris- 
ing that  this  text  should  be  cited  to  prove  that  there 
was  a  covenant  of  redemption  made  between  the 
persons  of  the  Godhead,  who  are  essentially  one, 
in  eternity.  From  the  context  it  is  manifest  the 
Psalmist  was  speaking  of  the  willingness  of  God's 
people  to  execute  his  commands  in  the  day  of  his 
powerful  vengeance.  V.  2.  The  Lord  shall  send 
the  rod  of  his  strength  out  of  Zion  :  rule  thou  in  the 
midst  of  thine  enemies.  V.  3.  Thy  people  shall  be 
toilling,  &c.   ..Any  considerate  mind  must  be  con- 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        21: 

■vinced  from  the  reading  this  text,  that,  it  can  have 
no  reference  to  such  a  covenant  as  you  have  sup- 
posed. 

3.  You  next  quote  Isaiah  liii.  10,  11.  When  thou 
shaft  make  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin,  he  shall  sec 
his  seed: — He  shall  sec  the  travail  of  his  soul,  and 
be  satisfied.  This  text,  which  relates  altogether  to 
the  sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
glorious  consequences  thereof,  you  quoted  to  prove 
that  there  was  a  covenant  made  between  the  triune 
God  in  eternity!  Is  not  this  manifestly  wresting 
scripture,  if  not  to  our  own  destruction,  at  least  to 
I  he  destruction  of  truth  and  consistency  ?  In  regard 
to  the  other  text  which  you  have  quoted,  I  have 
already  explained  it,  see  p.  1 15.  These  are  all  the 
texts  which  you  have  cited  to  support  your  notion 
of  the  covenant  of  redemption. 

4.  You  say,  p.  109,  That  the  covenant  of  re- 
demption "  is  distinct  from  the  covenant  of  grace." 
Redemption  signifies,  to  re-purchase  what  had  been 
sold  or  lost.*  Thus  understood,  all  the  temporal 
and  spiritual  blessings  of  life,  not  excepting  our 
own  existence,  which  were  forfeited  by  Adam's  sin3 
arc  in  consequence  of  tftc  price  of  redemption.  All 
were  lost  in  Adam — all  were  re-purchased  by 
Christ,  the  second  Adam.  Whether  therefore,  the 
covenant  of  redemption  was  made  in  eternity,  or  in 
time,  whether  before  the  fatal  apostacy,  or  after  it, 
it  is  manifest  that  it  was  not  restricted  to  a  part  of 
Adam's  posterity,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  the  rest*— 

*  Sc«  Cruderis  Concordance. 
T 


218  LETTER  V. 

And  if  the  above  definition  of  redemption  be  accu- 
rate, (which,  I  think,  cannot  be  reasonably  dispu- 
ted) docs  not  the  work  of  redemption,  or  the  act  of 
redeeming,  relate  to  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Je- 
sus Christ,  by  which  he  purchased  these  favours  for 
us  ?  If  so,  what  becomes  of  your  partial  and  con- 
tracted views  of  it,  which  say,  that  its  benefits  ex- 
tend to  only  a  part  of  the  human  family  ?  After 
Adam's  transgression,  God  came  down  in  the  cool  of 
the  day,  and  made  promise  of  a  Saviour  to  him. — 
And  it  is  certain  all  the  human  race  were  represent- 
atively in  Adam  when  he  fell ;  and  of  course  were, 
in  the  same  sense,  in  him  when  the  promise  of  a 
Redeemer  was  made.  And  by  what  rule  of  rea- 
soning, or  from  what  part  of  scripture,  will  you 
prove  that  the  promise  was  made  only  to  a  part  of 
Adam's  posterity,  who  were  then  in  his  loins  ?  All 
the  human  family  were  then  in  his  loins,  and  there- 
fore all  were  equally  interested  in  the  grand  cove- 
nant of  redemption. 

5.  According  to  your  representation  of  this  sub- 
ject, the  covenant  of  redemption,  which  you  sup- 
pose was  made  in  eternity,  is  the  new  covenant,  I 
.-suppose  in  contradistinction  from  the  covenant  of 
works,  which  was  made  with  Adam  in  Paradise, — 
However  accurate  it  may  be  to  distinguish  these 
covenants  one  from  the  other,  it  seems  quite  im- 
proper, upon  your  view  of  the  subject,  to  denominate 
the  covenant  of  redemption,  the  nezu  covenant.  For 
if  this  covenant  were  made  in  eternity,  "between 
the  persons  of  the  godhead,"  as  you  affirm,  it  must 


ON  PALLING  FROM  GRACE.         219 

be  the  old  covenant.  And,  in  respect  to  this,  the 
Apostle  saith,  Heb.  viii.  13.  "  He  hath  made  the 
first  old.  Now,  that  which  dccayeth,  and  waxclh 
old,  is  ready  to  vanish  cnc ay. "  But  in  regard  to  the 
new  covenant,  the  same  inspired  Apostle  saith,  ch. 
x.  16 — 20.  "  This  is  the  covenant  that  I  will  make 
with  them  after  those  days,  saith  the  Lord,  I  will 
put  my  laws  into  their  hearts,  and  in  their  minds  will 
f  wi-iic' them ;  and  their  sins  and  iniquities  will  I 
remember  no  more.  Now  where  remission  of  these 
is,  there  is  no  more  offering  for  sin.  Having 
therefore,  brethren,  boldness  to  enter  intothe  holi- 
est by  the  blood  of  jesus,  by  a  new  axd  living 
way,  which  he  hath  consecrated  for  us,  through  the 
veil,  that  is  to  say,  his  flesh."  Here  is  a  descrip- 
tion of  the  new  covenant ;  and  there  is  not  the  re- 
motest allusion  to  its  being  made  in  eternity,  "  be- 
tween the  persons  of  the  godhead."  All  the  bles- 
sings flowing  from  it,  are  represented  as  being  in 
consequence  of  the  efficacious  blood  of  jesus, 
which  you  allow  was  shed  for  all  mankind.  It  be- 
ing scriptural,  and  therefore  proper,  to  denominate 
this  covenant  near,  is  no  inconsiderable  proof 
against  your  opinion  respecting  its  having  been 
made  from  all.  eternity  :  because,  in  that  case,  it. 
should  be  called  the  old  covenant,  if  we  use  terms 
according  to  their  established  import.  It  is  mani- 
fest that  Adam  was  not  made  in  eternity,  but  in  ti.ne  ; 
and  therefore  the  covenant  of  works  which  was 
made  with  him,  was  also  in  time;  consequently,  al- 
lowing your  notion  of  the  covenant  of  redemption. 


220  LETTER  V. 

the  covenant  of  works  was  posterior  to  the  Covenant 
of  redemption,  and  of  course  it  should  be  called 
the  new  covenant.  But  the  scriptures  uniformly 
distinguish  the  covenant  of  redemption  from  the 
covenant  of  works,  by  calling  it  new  ;  from  which 
circumstance  it  follows,  that  this  part  of  your  forti- 
fication is  vulnerable,  I  mean,  that  your  notions  res- 
pecting the  covenant  of  redemption,  appear  un- 
scriptural.  And  inasmuch  as  this  covenant  was 
ratified  by  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ ;  and  as  this 
blood  was  poured  out  for  all  men,  it  follows  that 
God  had  respect  to  all  the  human  family,  when  this 
covenant  was  made  and  ratified. 

6.  To  be  convinced  of  this,  we  need  only  appeal 
*o  those  scriptures  which  speak  on  this  subject. — 
Isa.  liii.  6.  All  we  like  sheep  have  gone  astray  $  we 
have  turned  every  one  from  his  own  way,  and  the 
Lord  hath  laid  upon  him  the  iniquity  of  us  all.  Ac- 
cording to  this  solemn  declaration  of  the  Prophet, 
all  those  who  had  gone  astray  were  interested  in 
the  meritorious  sufferings  of  Christ.  And  certainly 
all  had  gone  astray ;  and  therefore  the  iniquity  of 
all  was  laid  upon  him.  The  same  sentiment  is  in- 
culcated by  the  Apostle  Paul,  2  Cor.  v.  14.  For 
the  love  of  Christ  constraineth  us,  because  we  thus 
judge,  that  if  one  died  for  all  then  were  all  dead. — 
Here  it  should  be  noticed  that  the  Apostle  assumes 
as  an  indisputable  truth,  that  Christ  died  for  all, 
from  whence  he  drew  the  conclusion,  that  all  were 
dead.  Titus  ii.  5,  6.  For  there  is  one  God,  and  one 
mediator  betzvecnGod  and  men,  theman  Christ  Jesus; 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.         221 

who  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all,  to  be  testified  in 
due  time,  Heb.  ii.  9.  That  he  by  the  grace  of  God 
should  taste  death  for  every  man.  From  these  texts 
of  sacred  scripture,  it  is  evident  that,  If  the  cove- 
nant of  redemption  signifies  as  you  say  it  does,  that 
"  The  Father  engages  to  give  up  his  Son  to  "become 
a  propitiation  for  sin,"  it  includes  ample  provision 
for  the  sin  of  the  whole  world.  And  that  it  does,  is 
undeniably  proved  by  the  testimony  of  John,  chap, 
ii.  2.  And  he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins,  and 
not  for  ours  only,  but  also  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 
world.  If  therefore  there  be  any  credit  due  to  in- 
spiration, (and  who  but  infidels  can  pretend  to  doubt 
it)  we  cannot  hesitate  to  believe,  that  if  Christ  were 
given  for  any,  he  was  given  for  all ;  for  we  have  the 
same  proof  of  the  one  as  of  the  other.  It  follows 
then  that  whether  the  covenant  of  redemption  was 
made  before  the  apostacy  of  man,  or  after,  whether 
"  between  the  persons  of  the  Godhead,"  or  be- 
tween the  triune  God  and  man,  it  is  indisputably 
certain,  that  it  comprehended  all  mankind,  making 
ample  provision  for  the  salvation  of  each  individual 
of  the  human  race.  This  point  being  established, 
we  have  as  full  proof  as  we  can  ask  for  against  your 
contracted  and  unscriptural  notion  of  the  covenant 
of  redemption.  That  the  atonement  was  made  for 
all,  is  so  clearly  demonstrated  from  scripture,  you 
are  forced  to  yield  to  its  truth  ;  for  in  your  seventh 
sermon,  p.  154,  you  say  that  the  atonement  was 
made  "  not  for  a  part,  but  for  all  mankind  ;"  but 
yet  in  this  fifth  sermon,  you  contend  that  the  core- 
t  2 


222  LETTER  V. 

nant  of  redemption,  includes  "  only  a  part  of  man- 
kind,*'— and  in  your  sermon  on  election  you  main- 
tain that  God  from  all  eternity  reprobated  a  part  of 
mankind  to  eternal  torments  !  How  you  will  recon- 
cile these  discordant  sentiments,  who  can  tell  ? 

7.  Your  doctrine,  sir,  sets. God  the  Father  and 
God  the  Son  at  variance.  It  represents  God  the 
Father  as  dooming  from  all  eternity  a  part  of 
Adam's  children  to  never-ending  torments,  not  be- 
cause he  foresaw  they  would  reject  the  offers  of 
mercy,  and  thus  fit  themselves  for  destruction  ;  but 
merely  because  he  would,  or  because  he  saw  it  ne- 
cessary for  the  "  good  of  the  great  whole."  And  yet 
it  represents  God  the  Son  as  dying  to  make  recon- 
ciliation for  those  identical  reprobates,  that  they 
might  be  saved.  In  this  manner  the  Son  of  God  is 
represented  as  opposing  the  designs  of  the  Father. 
Jesus  Christ  wept  over  Jerusalem,  saying,  Hozo 
often  would  I  have  gathered  you,  but  ye  would 
not — but  according  to  your  system,  God  the 
Father  had  from  all  eternity  reprobated  those  very 
Jews  from  all  the  benefits  of  Christ's  death.  Was 
Jesus  Christ,  think  you,  ignorant  of  this  decree  of 
reprobation  ;  and  therefore  died  to  save  those  who 
were  doomed  to  everlasting  perdition  ?  If  he  knew 
there  were  such  a  decree,  why  did  he  die  for  them  ? 
This  single  fact,  that  Christ  died  to  make  atone- 
ment for  all  mankind,  which  you  also  admit,  is  suf- 
ficient to  erase  from  the  foundation,  the  whole 
fabric  of  partial  election,  reprobation,  and  limited 
ledemption,  which  you  have  vainly  attempted  to 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.         223 

support.  Moreover,  to  assert  that  God  from  all 
eternity  reprobated  the  Jews  to  everlasting  misery  ; 
and  also  that  Christ  died  for  them,  and  wept  over 
them  while  beholding  their  approaching  doom,  is 
impeaching  the  sincerity  of  the  benevolent  Saviour 
of  sinners,  and  calling  in  question  his  infinite  know- 
ledge. If  he  really  knew  there  were  such  a  decree, 
and  that  it  was  founded  in  justice  and  goodness, 
and  then  set  himself  to  oppose  its  taking  effect  by 
atoning  for  their  sins,  that  they  might  be  saved, 
conveys  such  a  contemptible  idea  of  the  immacu- 
late author  of  our  salvation,  that  if  there  were  no 
other  assignable  reason,  this  alone  would  be  suffi- 
cient to  induce  us  to  reject  your  system.  On  this 
account  your  new  system  is  far  worse  than  old  Cal- 
vinism, which  limits  the  atonement  to  the  elect 
only  :  for  in  so  doing,  it  does  not  set  the  Father  and 
Son  at  variance.  If  the  Lord  Jesus  tasted  death  for 
every  man,  as  he  certainly  did,  (and  in  this  point 
you  have  the  honour  oi  concurring  with  scripture) 
then  your  notions  of  the  covenant  of  redemption  are 
incorrect. 

8.  Perhaps  you  will  say,  "  That  although  Jesus 
Christ  died  for  all  men,  he  did  not  die  to  save  them." 
If  he  did  not  die  to  save  them,  what  end  had  he  in 
view  in  dying  for  them  ?  To  damn  them  in  hell  for 
ever  ?  Was  this  the  benevolent  intention  of  the  im- 
maculate Son  of  God  in  dying  for  sinners  !  Is  it  pos- 
sible for  the  human  mind  to  conceive  a  more  dis- 
honourable idea  of  the  loving  Saviour  of  the  world  ! 
Some   have  intimated  that  he  died  for  those  wfio 


%24  LETTER  V. 

were  eternally  reprobated,  that  they  might  enjoy 
temporal  blessings.  But  this  certainly  is  making  a 
bad  matter  zvorse ;  for  the  more  temporal  mercies 
are  enjoyed  and  abused,  the  more  will  misery  be 
augmented  eternally.  For  mankind  are  not  only 
accountable  for  spiritual  mercies,  but  also  for  tem- 
poral favours.  This  is  manifest  from  the  many  se- 
rious warnings  recorded  in  the  sacred  Scriptures, 
which  are  given  to  those  who  are  rich  in  this  world's 
goods.  Make  to  yourselves  friends  with  the  mam- 
mon of  unrighteousness,  &c.  To  suppose  there- 
fore that  the  Lord  Jesus  died  only  to  purchase  tem- 
poral mercies  for  the  reprobates,  without  any  inten- 
tion to  save  them,  is  to  suppose  that  he  designed 
only  to  bring  them  into  personal  existence,  that 
they  might  be  fatted  for  the  slaughter,  and  that  their 
eternal  misery  in  hell  might  be  the  more  complete  ! 
And  he  must  have  had,  either  no  end  in  view,  or  he 
must  have  designed  their  salvation,  or  their  damna- 
tion. To  say  he  had  no  end  in  view,  is  to  impeach 
his  wisdom.  To  say  he  designed  their  damnation 
while  he  bled  upon  the  cross  for  them,  is  to  make 
him  the  most  execrable  hypocrite  ?  What !  Pray 
for  those  whose  damnation  he  meant  to  secure,  and 
whose  misery  he  meant  to  augment,  by  this  amazing 
act  of  love  ! 

But,  the  Apostle  Paul  will  tell  us  for  what  pur- 
pose Christ  tasted  death  for  every  man  ;  "  And  that 
he  died  for  all,  that  they  which  live,  should  not 
henceforth  live  unto  themselves,  but  unto  him  which 
died  for  them,  and  rose  again,"  2  Cor.  v.  1£* — 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        225 

In  these  words  it  is  explicitly  stated,  1.  That  Christ 
died  for  all,  without  exception.  2.  That  the  end 
of  his  dying  for  them  was,  that  they  might  live  unto 
him  who  thus  died  for  them.  This  puts  the  matter 
beyond  dispute  respecting  the  design  of  his  having 
died  for  all  men.  Now  if  he  died  that  they  might 
be  saved,  it  is  also  possible  they  should  be  saved; 
and  if  possible  they  should  be  saved,  then  they 
wore  not  excluded  from  all  the  benefits  of  redemp*' 
tion,  nor  reprobated  from  all  eternity  by  an  irresist- 
ible decree.  So  that,  view  your  system  which  way 
we  will,  its  erroncousness  stares  us  in  the  face. — 
For,  by  even  allowing  that  Christ  died  to  purchase 
temporal  mercies  for  the  reprobates,  we  thereby 
destroy  your  contracted  views  of  the  covenant  of 
redemption,  unless  you  suppose  these  blessings 
were  not  forfeited ;  and  if  they  were  not  forfeited, 
then  they  have  a  right  to  them,  on  the  principle  of 
justice.  Will  this  do  ?  I  trow  not.  For  if  they 
can  claim  them  as  their  right  they  are  not  of  gracs, 
and  if  not  of  grace,  there  is  no  cause  of  thanksgiving 
for  them. 

9.  To  shew  that  your  distinction  between  re- 
demption and  the  atonement  is  unscriptural,  I  shall 
examine  those  scriptures  which  speak  upon  this 
subject.  To  redeem  signifies,  as  I  have  before  ob- 
served, to  buy  again  something  which  had  been  sold, 
or  forfeited.  In  this  sense  the  word  is  used  Lev. 
xxv.  25.  If  thy  brother  be  waxen  poor,  and  hath 
sold  away  some  of  his  possession,  and  if  any  of  his 
kin  come  t9  redeem  it,  then  shall  he  redeem  that  wh 


226  LETTER  V. 

hi*  brother  sold.  In  this  sense  also  it  is  used  when; 
speaking  of  the  redemption  of  souls  :  Isaiah  lii.  3. 
For  thus  saith  the  Lord,  ye  have  sold  yourselves  for 
nought ;  and  ye  shall  be  redeemed  (or  bought  back) 
without  money.  In  regard  to  the  work  of  redemp- 
tion accomplished  by  Christ,  the  scriptures  uni- 
formly ascribe  it  to  his  death,  to  the  shedding  of  his 
blood — 1  Pet.  i.  18,  19.  Ye  were  not  redeemed  zvith 
Corruptible  things — But  with  the  precious  blood  of 
Christ,  as  of  a  lamb  without  blemish,  and  without 
spot.  Rev.  v.  9.  For  thou  ivast  slain,  and  hast  re- 
deemed us  to  God  by  thy  blood.  From  these  pas- 
sages of  scripture  it  is  obvious,  that  the  bitter  suf- 
ferings and  bloody  death  of  Jesus  Christ  was  the 
grand  work,  the  price  of  redemption.  This  is  also 
pointedly  expressed  by  Paul,  Gal.  iv.  4,  5.  But 
when  the  fulness  of  the  time  was  come,  God  sent  forth 
his  Son,  made  of  a  woman,  made  under  the  law,  To 
redeem  them  that  were  under  the  law,  that  we  might 
receive  the  adoption  of  sons.  Those  who  have  re- 
demption, are  said  to  have  it  through  his  blood — 
Eph.  i.  7.  In  whom  we  have  redemption  through  his 
blood,  even  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  according  to  the 
riches  of  his  grace.  In  all  these  texts  which  speak 
expressly  on  the  subject  of  redemption,  there  is  no 
information  respecting  a  covenant  "  made  between 
the  persons  of  the  Godhead"  for  one  part  of  man- 
kind only;  but  they  relate  expressly  to  the  suffer- 
ings and  death  of  Jesus  Christ.  By  admitting 
therefore  that  Christ  died  for  all,  you  also  admit 
that  the  scheme  of  redemption  comprehended  all ; 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        2i7 

so  that  your  distinction  between  the  work  oT 
atonement  and  redemption  is  utterly  repugnant 
to  scripture.  To  redeem  is  to  buy,  by  paying 
the  price  demanded.  Mankind  had  sold  them- 
selves to  sin.  In  consequence  of  this,  divine  jus- 
t  ice  had  an  inflexible  demand  upon  them.  The 
Law  of  God  was  armed  with  awful  penalties  against 
its  violators  ;  and  Jesus  Christ  came  to  redeem  us 
from  this  curse,  by  being  made  a  curse  for  us.  To 
effect  this  benevolent  design  it  was  necessary  he 
should  die^  because  the  sentence  denounced  against 
man  was  death — And  he  died  for  all  without  excep- 
tion. Hence  it  is  said,  Ye  are  not  your  own,  for  ye 
are  bought  with  a  price.  If  then  the  death  of  Jesus 
Christ  was  the  meritorious  act  by  which  the  glori- 
ous work  of  redemption  was  accomplished,  and  if 
he  died  for  all  as  the  scriptures  assert,  and  you  ad- 
mit, then  your  distinction  between  redemption  and 
atonement  is  unfounded. 

10.  Perhaps  you  will  reply,  that  the  atonement  is 
distinct  from  the  covenant  of  grace.  We  grant 
there  is  a  distinction.  For  the  grand  work  of 
atonement  was  completed  without  any  condition  on. 
our  part.  Christ  by  his  sufferings  and  death  ac- 
complished this  work,  and  thereby  opened  a  way 
by  which  sinners  might  come  to  God  and  obtain  life 
everlasting.  But  there  is  no  such  distinction  as 
you  suppose  there  is,  between  the  covenant  of  re- 
demption, and  the  covenant  of  grace.  The  first 
you  think  is  limited  to  the  elect  only ;  whereas  I 
have  already  proved  that  it  is  full  and  complete  for 


228  LETTER  Y. 

all  the  human  family.  But  the  latter,  the  covenant 
of  grace,  is  conditional.  It  is  made  between  God 
and  man.  All,  it  is  true,  are  both  commanded  and 
invited  to  accede  to  its  terms,  and  live.  That  this 
covenant  is  conditional,  the  text,  which  you  have 
made  the  foundation  of  your  discourse  on  this  sub- 
ject, abundantly  proves.  John  vi.  47.  He  that  be- 
lleveth  on  me  hath  everlasting  life.  Here  believeth 
is  the  express  condition,  on  the  performance  of 
which  everlasting  life  is  given. 

1 1.  It  may  be  said,  "  That  if  Christ  made  an  un- 
conditional atonement  for  all  mankind,  then  all  will 
be  saved."  This  indeed  would  follow,  if  salvation 
were  also  unconditional.  But  this  is  not  the  case ; 
which  is  demonstrated  from  those  passages  of  scrip- 
ture which  prove  that  some  of  those  for  whom  Christ 
died,  nevertheless  perish.  Isa.  xxii.  8,  9.  Where- 
fore hath  the  Lord  done  this  unto  this  city  ?  Then 
they  shall  answer,  (not  because  they  were  excluded 
from  the  covenant  of  redemption  by  a  decree  of 
reprobation,  but)  because  they  have  forsaken  the 
covenant  of  the  Lord  their  God.  You  say  the  cov- 
enant of  grace  is  unconditional.  But  it  seems  in 
the  circumstance  before  us,  that  in  consequence  of 
their  not  fulfilling  the  condition,  they  were  cast  off. 
Heb.  viii.  9.  Because  they  continued  not  in  my  cov- 
enant, and  I  regarded  them  not,  saith  the  Lord. — 
From  these  texts  it  appears  the  people  forfeited 
the  blessings  annexed  to  the  covenant,  because  they 
did  not  fulfil  its  conditions.  2  Pet.  ii.  1.  Even  de- 
iiying  the  Lord  that  bought  them,   and  bring  upon 


ON  PALLING  PROM  GRACE.         2$9 

themselves  swift  destruction.  Did  not  those  who 
were  bought  by  Christ,  belong  to  him  by  right  of 
redemption  ?  And  yet  it  seems  some  of  those  very 
persons  brought  upon  themselves  swift  destruction  ! 
John  xvii.  12.  Those  thou  gavest  me  I  have  kept, 
and  none  of  them  is  lost,  but  the  son  of  perdition,— 
Here  also,  we  have  an  account  of  one  who  had 
been  given  to  Christ,  that  was  lost.  You  say,  p. 
106.  Christ  engages  "  to  save  to  the  uttermost  all 
whom  the  Father  has  given  him."  If  this  be  so. 
then  Christ  was  not  true  to  his  engagements  ;  for 
he  himself  saith,  in  the  above  passage,  that  he  had 
lost  one  whom  the  Father  had  given  him.  And  if 
Christ  does  not  fulfil  his  engagements,  "  how  can 
he  be  said  to  be  faithful  to  his  Father?"  p.  107. 

1 2.  In  regard  to  the  price  of  redemption,  or  work 
of  atonement,  I  grant,  it  "  did  not  depend  on  any 
conditions  to  be  performed  by  men,"  because  it  was 
•  •fleeted  by  Jesus  Christ,  independently  of  all  men  ; 
but  that  our  present  and  eternal  salvation  is  sus- 
pended on  conditions  to  be  performed  by  men,  is 
abundantly  manifest  from  numerous  passages  oi 
scripture.  I  have  already  observed  that  your  text 
is  a  proof  in  point,  He  that  believeth  on  me,  hath  ev- 
erlasting life.  And  it  should  be  noted  that  there  is 
a  material  difference  between  believ-eth  and  be- 
liev-ed.  The  former,  according  to  the  strictest 
rules  of  language,  signifying  a  continuation  in  the 
faith  ;  the  latter  being  a  participle  in  the  past  tense, 
refers  to  an  act  previously  performed.  We  know 
also  ilmt  faith  without  works  is  dead,  being  alone, — 

IT 


230  LETTER  V. 

In  order  to  continue  in  the  faith  we  must  persevere 
in  every  good  word  and  work.  Seest  thou  how  faith 
wrought  together  with  his  works,  and  by  works  was 
faith  made  perfect.  Jam.  ii.  22.  Everlasting  life  is 
no  where  promised  but  in  connexion  with  believ- 
ing. By  what  rule  of  criticism,  or  reasoning,  will 
you  attempt  to  prove  that  believing  is  not  a  duty, 
and  therefore  not  a  condition  ?  But  if  you  have  not 
givten  us  the  proof  we  have  your  assertion.  "  Christ 
did  not  engage  conditionally  that  he  would  keep 
believers  from  falling,  provided  they  were  willing 
to  be  kept,"  p.  108.  This  is  a  bold  assertion,  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  plainest  declarations  of 
scripture.  John  xv.  7,  a  If  ye  abide  in  me,  and  my 
words  abide  in  you,  ye  shall  ask  what  ye  will,  and 
it  shall  be  done  unto  you.1'  Vcr.  10.  "  If  ye  keep 
my  commandments  ye  shall  abide  in  my  lo've." — 
Here  Christ  promises  to  answer  their  prayer  on 
condition  of  their  abiding  in  him  ;  and  on  condition 
of  keeping  his  commandments,  they  shall  abide  in 
his  love,  John  xii.  46.  "I  am  come  a  light  into 
the  world,  that  whosoever  believeth  in  me,  should 
not  abide  in  darkness."  Here  is  the  condition  of  be- 
lieving, in  order  to  a  deliverance  from  darkness, — 
xiii.  17.  "  If  ye  know  these  things,  happy  are  ye  if 
ye  do  them."  Col.  i.  23.  "  If  ye  continue  in  the 
faith,  grounded  and  settled,  and  be  not  moved  away 
from  the  hope  of  the  gospel,"  &c.  This  was  a 
solemn  caution  to  those  who  were  sometimes 
alienated,  and  enemies  in  their  minds  by  wicked 
works,  but  were  now  reconciled,  ver.   14.     And  con* 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        231 

iinuing  in  the  faith  is  the  express  condition  of  their 
final  salvation.  Rev.  x.  1 1 .  "  Be  thou  faithful  un- 
to death,  and  I  will  give  thee  a  crown  of  life — He 
(hat  overcometh  shall  not  be  hurt  of  the  second 
death."  According  to  these  declarations  of  the 
faithful  and  true  witness,  the  crown  of  life  was  sus- 
pended on  condition  of  the  faithfulness  of  the  Anget 
of  the  Church  of  Smyrna  ;  and  to  avoid  the  second 
death,  he  must  continue  to  overcome.  These  quo- 
tations are  sufficient  to  convince  every  unbiassed 
mind,  that  you  have  no  authority  from  scripture  to 
say  "  Christ  did  not  engage  conditionally  to  keep 
believers  from'falling."  See  also  2  Pet.  i.  5 — 10, 
If  ye  do  these  things  ye  shall  never  full. 

13.  In  page  109  you  quote  Isaiah  lv.  3.  Incline 
your  ear  and  come  unto  me  ;  hear,  and  your  soul 
shall  live — and  I  will  make  an  everlasting  covenant 
with  you,  even  the  sure  mercies  of  David.  O  the 
power  of  prejudice  !  In  this  very  passage  which 
you  quote  to  prove  the  certain  and  unconditional 
perseverance  of  all  who  ever  believed,  there  are  no 
less  than  three  conditions  expressed.  1.  Incline 
your  tar.  2.  Come  unto  me.  3.  Hear — And  then 
there  is  a  three-fold  promise,  answering  to  the  con- 
ditions. 1.  Your  soul  shall  Use.  2.  /  will  make  an 
everlasting  covenant  with  you.  3.  Even  the  sure 
mercies  of  David.  Indeed  you  yourself  say,  "  They 
are  invited  and  commanded  to  accept  of  it."  And 
is  not  accepting  of  a  promise  a  condition  !  If  a 
promise  of  any  thing  is  made  to  a  person  on  condi- 
tion of  his  acceptance,  does  it  not  presuppose  that 


232  LETTER  V. 

if  he  do  not  accept,  the  promise  shall  not  be  ac- 
complished 1 

II.  1.  Having  thus  paved  the  way,  I  shall,  in  (he 
second  place  endeavour  to  prove  the  possibility  of 
a  saint's  so  falling  from  faith  and  love,  as  to  perish 
forever.  1  Chron.  xxviii.  9.  If  thou  seek  him  he 
xoill  be  found  of  thee.  ;  but  if  thou  forsake  him  he  will 
cast  thee  off  forever.  Isa.  i.  23.  And  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  transgressors  and  of  the  sinners  shall  be 
together,  and  they  that  forsake  the  Lord  shall  be  con- 
aimed.  Ezek.  xxxiii.  13.  When  the  righteous  turn- 
eth  from  his  righteousness,  and  committeth  iniquity, 
He  shall  even  die  thereby.  See  also  ver.  12,  13.  To 
ihis  text  some  have  objected,  That  the  righteous 
spoken  of  were  self-righteous — but  this  is  a  misera- 
ble evasion  to  avoid  the  point  of  truth.  A  self- 
righteous  man  is  a  wicked  man.  And  would  it  not 
be  perfect  nonsense  to  say  to  a  wicked  man,  that,  if 
iic  turned  from  his  wickedness,  and  committeth  ini- 
quity, all  his  wickedness  should  not  be  remember-, 
ed,  but  for  his  wickedness  he  should  surely  die  ! — 
John  xv.  6.  If  a  man  abide  not  in  me  he  is  cast 
forth  as  a  branch,  and  is  withered  ;  and  men  gather 
them,  and  cast  them  into  the  fire,  and  they  are  burned. 
To  this  some  may  object,  that  the  abiding  in  Christ 
means,  to  abide  externally  in  him — but  this  frivo- 
lous objection  will  be  entirely  removed  by  attend- 
ing to  the  context.  Inverse  1,  Christ  compares 
himself  to  the  vine  ;  and  in  ver.  2,  his  disciples  to 
the  branches.     He  then  in  ver.  3,  addresses  them 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        233 

thus  j  "  Now  ye  are  clean  through  the  word  which 
I  have  spoken  unto  you."  If  the  persons  spoken 
of  were  only  externally  in  him,  he  has  taught  them 
to  abide  externally  in  him  ;  which  is  the  same  as  to 
teach  them  to  remain  merely  nominal  professors  of 
religion,  and  they  should  bring  forth  much  fruit — 
but  if  a  man  did  not  abide  nominally  in  him,  he 
should  be  cast  forth  as  a  branch,  and  finally  be 
burned.  In  opposition  to  this  sentiment,  we  may 
observe,  that  mere  nominal  professors  of  religion 
are  never  said  to  be  in  Christ.  On  the  contrary  it 
is  said,  "  If  any  man  be  in  Christ  he  is  a  new  crea- 
ture." Moreover,  the  stfme  persons  said  to  be  in 
Christ  the  true  zinc,  are  pronounced  clean  by  Christ 
himself. 

2.  Heb.  vi.  4 — 6.  For  it  is  impossible  for  those 
who  were  once  enlightened,  and  have  tasted  of  the 
heavenly  gift,  and  were  made  partakers  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  have  tasted  of  the  good  word  of  God,  and 
the  powers  of  the  world  to  come,  if  they  shall  fall 
away,  to  renew  them  again  to  repentance  ;  seeing  they 
crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh,  and  put 
him  to  an  open  shame.  It  is  not  a  little  surprising 
that  persons  who  think  it  impossible  to  be  delivered 
from  sin  in  this  life,  should  nevertheless  suppose 
that  a  person  may  attain  to  the  several  particulars 
mentioned  in  this  passage,  and  yet  not  have  a  Chris- 
tian experience.  I  know  not  to  what  higher  attain- 
ments a  christian  can  arrive  in  this  life,  than,  1.  To 
be  enlightened — The  eyes  of  your  understanding 
\j  2 


^34  LETTER  V. 

being  enlightened,  says  Paul  to  the  Ephesian  be- 
lievers. 2.  To  taste  of  the  heavenly  gift, — Taste, 
says  the  Psalmist,  and  see  that  the  Lord  is  gracious. 
3.  To  be  made  partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost, — As 
many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  they  are  the  sons 
of  God,  The  Holy  Ghost  was  considered  one  of 
the  greatest  gifts  in  the  primitive  age  of  Christiani- 
ty. 4.  And  of  the  good  word  of  God,  and  the 
powers  of  the  world  to  come.  Such  may  never- 
theless fall  away  and  perish  forever.  But,  says  the 
objector,  "  If  they  shall  fall  away — whereas  it  is 
impossible  they  should."  Those  who  will  consult 
the  original  Greek  text,"  will  agree  with  Wesley, 
Macknight,  and  other  learned  critics,  that  there  is 
'io  if  in  the  original.  The  literal  translation  would 
be,  Having  fallen  away,  &c. 

3.  Passages  of  scripture  speaking  a  similar  lan- 
guage could  easily  be  multiplied  ;  but  they  who  will 
not  be  convinced  by  those  already  cited,  would  not 
be  persuaded  by  an  hundred  more.  I  consider  the 
question  under  consideration  fully  decided  from  un- 
equivocal scripture  testimony  5  and  therefore  the  con- 
•rary  doctrine,  that  a  believer  cannot  fall  away  and 
- .ierish,  cannot  be  true.  When  you  are  able  to  bring 
one  text  which  says  a  saint  cannot  thus  fall  away, 
it  will  be  time  to  review  the  ground  ;  but  this  you 
neither  have,  nor  can  do, — and  as  to  your  inferen- 
tial proof,  deduced  from  the  covenant  of  redemp- 
tion, and  the  covenant  of  grace,  as  it  is  founded  in 
erroneous  conceptions   of  those  covenants,  it  can 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.         235 

never    stand    against    the    pointed    testimony   of 
scripture.* 

III.  1.  In  part  second,  you  make  an  attempt  to 
obviate  some  objections  to  your  doctrine.  You 
suppose  the  objector  to  ask,  "  Why  is  it  so  often 
spoken  of  as  suspended  on  conditions  ?"  And  after 
making  some  unimportant  observations,  you  say. 
u  It  is  by  complying  with  these  conditions,  that  we 
make  our  salvation  sure,"  p.  115.  Here,  sir,  you 
give  up  the  doctrine  of  unconditional  election,  and 
perseverance  ;  it  being  certain,  that  if  the  salvation 
of  all  the  elect  were  secured  when  the  covenant  of 
redemption  was  made  kC  between  the  persons  of  the 
Godhead,"'  as  you  elsewhere  assert,  it  is  not  made 
sure  by  any  condition  performed  by  them;  or,  if  it 
be  made  "  sure"  by  performing  the  condition,  it 
was  not  made  "  sure"  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world.  The  flood  tide  of  scripture  truth  will  sweep 
you  from  your  "  foundation  work"  sometimes.  Did 
you  mean  to  assert  in  this  place  that  the  covenant  of 
grace  is  conditional  ?  If  so,  have  we  any  right  to 
expect  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise  until  the  condi- 
tion be  complied  with  ?  But  how  is  your  assertion 
in  this  place  consistent  with  what  you  say,  p.  109o 
♦'  The  Holy  Spirit  covenanted,  without  any  condi- 
tions to  be  performed  by  men,  to  renew  and  sancti- 

*  Those  who  wish  to  see  this  subject  treated  more  largely, 
are  referred  to  a  work  now  publishing-  in  New-York,  by  the 
Book  Agents  for  the  Methodist  connexion,  written  by  Thoiflis 
Olivers,  one  of  the  European  Methodist  preachers-. 


236  LETTER  V. 

fy  the  hearts  of  all  those  whom  the  Father  gave  to 
the  Son."  When  the  hearts  of  believers  are  re- 
newed and  sanctified,  is  their  "  salvation  made 
sure  ?"  This  you  say  is  to  be  done  without  condi- 
tions ;  and  yet  our  salvation  is  to  be  made  sure  by 
performing  conditions  !  According  to  this  state- 
ment we  have  an  unconditional — conditional  cove- 
nant !  Inimitable  consistency  !  A  few  more  such 
strokes  of  Hopkinsian  divinity  will  add  new  lustre 
to  its  fame  ! 

2.  In  page  1 1 7,  you  intimate  that  from  real  god- 
liness a  man  cannot  turn  away,  but  "  from  a  pro- 
fession of  godliness  a  man  may  turn  away."  Had 
Satan  and  his  legions  only  a  profession  of  godliness^ 
antecedent  to  their  apostacy  ?  And  Adam  and  Eve, 
were  they  only  painted  sepulchres  when  they  came 
perfect  from  the  hands  of  their  Maker?  But  let  us 
examine  some  of  those  characters,  whose  apostacy 
is  recorded  in  the  holy  scriptures.  1  Tim.  i.  18, 
"  War  a  good  warfare,  holding  faith  and  a  good 
conscience,  which  some  having  put  away,  concern- 
ing faith  have  made  shipwreck."  Has  an  hypo- 
crite, or  a  mere  nominal  professor,  faith  and  a  good 
conscience  ?  Concerning  the  wicked,  it  is  said  they 
have  not  faith,  and  their  consciences  are  defied, — 
2  Pet.  ii.  20,  21.  "  If  after  they  have  escaped  the 
pollutions  of  the  world,  through  the  knowledge  of 
the  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  they  are  again 
entangled  therein  and  overcome  ;  the  latter  end  is 
worse  with  them  than  the  beginning.  For  it  had 
been  better  for  them  not  to  have  known  the  way  of 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.         m 

righteousness,  than  after  they  had  known  it,  to  turn 
from  the  holy  commandment  delivered  unto  them." 

On  this  text  it  is  proper  to  remark,  1 .  That  the 
persons  said  to  turn  away,  had  escaped  the  pollu- 
tions of  the  world,  through  the  "  knowledge  of  Je- 
sus Christ."  "  This  is  eternal  life  to  know  thee, 
the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou  hast 
sent."  Has  a  mere  external  professor  that  know- 
ledge of  God  which  is  eternal  life  ?  That  they  had 
in  reality  escaped  is  manifest  from  these  words, 
again  entangled  therein,  which  plainly  suppose  they 
had  been  once  disentangled.  2.  They  are  said  to 
have  known  the  way  of  righteousness,  which  no  hypo- 
crite does.  3.  They  turned  from  the  holy  com* 
aiandmcnt  delivered  unto  them.  No  words  can 
more  emphatically  mark  apostacy  from  real  godli- 
ness than  those  of  St.  Peter,  "  That  the  knowledge 
of  the  way  of  righteousness  which  they  had  attained,, 
was  an  inward  experimental  knowledge,  is  evident 
from  that  other  expression,  '  They  had  escaped  the 
pollutions  of  the  world  :'  an  expression  parallel  to 
that  in  the  preceding  chapter,  '  Having  escaped 
the  corruption  which  is  in  the  world.'  And  in  both 
chapters  this  effect  is  ascribed  to  the  same  cause : 
termed  in  the  first,  '  The  knowledge  of  him  who  hath 
called  us  to  glory  and  virtue  ;'  in  the  second  more 
explicitly,  The  knowledge  of  the  Lord  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ."     Discip.  p.  86. 

3.  To  this,  however,  you  oppose  a  text  of  scrip- 
ture. They  went  out  from  us,  but  they  were  not  of 
us  :  for  if  they  had  been  of  us,  they  would  no  doubt 


?38  LETTER  V. 

have  continued  with  us  :  but  they  zvent  out,  that  they, 
might  be  made  manifest,  that  they  were  not  all  of  us. 
On  this  text  you  observe,  "  The  whole  force  of  the 
Apostle's  argument,  to  prove  that  these  apostate 
professors  were  never  real  Christians,  will  go  to 
prove  that  all  other  apostates  were  never  real  Chris- 
tians,'5 p.  112.  Is  this  reasoning  conclusive?  Is 
it  not  rather  contrary  to  the  rule  of  sober  argument 
to  draw  general  conclusions  from  particular  facts. 
Suppose  it  were  a  fact  that  such  a  man  was  expelled 
from  your  church,  because  he  was  detected  for  hold- 
ing what  you  might  call  hcritical  doctrine,  which 
it  would  appear  he  always  held  :  would  it  be  deem- 
ed sound  logic  to  infer  from  this  solitary  instance, 
that  all  who  ever  embraced  heterodox  sentiments. 
had  never  embraced  your  system  of  doctrines  ? — 
Does  not  every  attentive  mind  see,  that  this  is  as- 
suming the  point  in  debate  ?  Equally  inconsequent 
is  your  reasoning  on  the  above  passage. 

But  St.  John  does  not  say  they  were  never  of 
them  ;  but  only  they  were  not  of  them  at  the  time 
they  went  out ;  for,  if  they  had  been  united  in 
Christian  affection  at  that  time,  they  would  no  doubt 
have  continued  with  them.  While  the  principle  of 
divine  love  abides  in  the  heart,  there  can  be  no  de- 
sire to  separate  from  the  real  children  of  God. — 
They  first  backslide  in  heart,  and  loose  that  warmth 
of  affection  which  they  once  had  for  their  brethren  i 
and  then  it  might  be  said  of  them  in  truth,  they  were 
not  of  vs. 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        239 

Thus,  no  doubt,  it  was  with  those  apostates  of 
which  John  speaks.  Ceasing  to  guard  "  the  sa- 
cred treasure"  of  brotherly  love,  and  gradually  de- 
clining in  the  divine  life,  they  lost  that  cordial  union 
with  the  living  members  of  Christ's  church,  which 
binds  them  together  in  the  bundle  of  life.  Being 
thus  separated  in  affection,  by  having  the  ligaments 
of  Christian  friendship  cut  asunder,  they  visibly 
separated  from  the  church,  and  joined  affinity  with 
the  world,  or  formed  a  party  of  their  own — so  that, 
at  the  time  they  went  out.  they  were  not  one  with 
the  faithful  in  Christ  Jesus.  This  is  the  general 
method  by  which  souls  apostatize  from  faith  and 
love.  They  seldom,  if  ever,  descend  from  a  high 
state  of  holiness,  to  a  low  slate  of  iniquity  at  once  ; 
but  first,  gradually  decline  in  regard  to  the  life  of 
inward  religion  until  they  lose  their  spiritual 
-trength,  and  then  they  become  an  easy  prey  to 
their  enemies. 

4.  It  should  be  carefully  noted  that  apostates  are 
threatened  for  their  apostacy,  and  not  for  what  they 
were  jyrcvious  to  their  fall.  If  they  were  always 
hypocrites,  why  are  they  threatened  with  a  sorer 
punishment  for  having  apostatized  ?  Is  it  such  a 
crime  for  them  to  forsake  their  hypocrisy,  that  they 
must  be  punished  with  everlasting  detruction  for  so 
doing  !  Heb.  x.  29.  "  Of  how  much  sorer  punish- 
ment, suppose  ye,  shall  he  be  thought  worthy,  who 
hath  trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  hath 
counted  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  wherewith  ht 
ilias  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing,  and  hath  done  des* 


240  LETTER  V. 

pite  unto  the  Spirit  of  grace."  Can  it  be  said,  in 
any  scriptural  sense,  that  a  mere  self-righteous, 
Pharisaical  professor,  is  sanctified  by  the  blood  of 
the  covenant?  But  the  persons  spoken  of  in  this 
text  are  said  to  have  been  thus  sanctified.  And  the 
much  sorer  punishment  spoken  of,  is  on  account  of 
their  ungrateful  apostacy,  which  supposes,  that  if 
they  had  retained  their  standing,  they  should  escape 
the  punishment  threatened.  But  hypocrites  and 
pharisees  will  be  punished  whether  they  stand  in 
their  deceit  or  not,  unless  they  sincerely  repent 
and  return  unto  God.  From  the  whole,  I  think  we 
have  abundant  reason  to  conclude  that  there  is  great 
danger  of  turning  away,  not  only  from  a  "  profes- 
sion of  godliness,"  but  also  from  a  state  of  justifi- 
cation and  sanctification.  If  you  say  impossible  : 
I  would  ask,  Is  it  not  possible  to  be  mistaken  in 
your  sentiment  on  this  subject  ?  If  you  say  no,  then 
you  set  up  for  infallibility  ;  a  claim  which  the  pro- 
iestant  world  will  not,  it  is  presumed,  allow  you. — 
If  you  say  it  is  possible  to  be  mistaken,  you  give  up 
the  point,  and  grant  the  possibility  of  totally  falling 
from  grace.  If  you  say  it  is  not  possible,  because 
the  scriptures  are  in  your  favour,  you  thereby  as- 
sume nearly  as  high  ground  as  the  Pope  still ;  be- 
cause the  reply  supposes  you  cannot  mistake  the 
meaning  of  scripture.  By  granting  the  bare  possi- 
bility of  mistaking  the  design  of  those  scriptures  you 
have  quoted  to  support  your  doctrine,  you  grant  all 
I  contend  for,  and  acknowledge  that  it  is  possible 
for  a  saint  so  to  fall  as  to  perish  forever.     This  ar- 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        241 

g.ument  cannot  be  retorted  upon  us,  for  we  allow  the 
possibility  of  a  believer's  persevering  steadfast  to 
the  end  :  and  also  that  there  is  no  necessity  for  any 
one  to  apostatize  from  the  faith. 

5.  It  should  be  carefully  noted  that  the  argument 
is,  respecting  the  bare  possibility  of  a  saint's  so  fal- 
ling from  grace  as  to  perish.     If,  indeed,  we  had  in- 
fallible testimony  that  any  one  ever  did  thus  apos- 
tatize, the  point  would  be  beyond  the  reach  of  con- 
troversy ;  but  as  the  question  now  stands  this  is  not 
necessary,  because  the  simple  question  is,  whether 
it  be  possible  :  and  any  thing  which  is  possible  may 
be.     Now  any  thing  is  possible  which  does  not  in- 
volve a  contradiction  ;  which  no  man,  I  think,  will 
contend   that  the  doctrine   contended  for  does. — 
This  being  duly  considered,  the   force  of  the  rea- 
soning above  will  be  felt,  viz.  That,  by  admitting 
the  mere  possibility  of  a  mistake,  on  your  side  of  the 
question,    the    impossibility    of    total    apostacy    is 
2;ivcn  up.      There  are    some  things  impossible. — 
All  which  involves  contradictions  and  absurdities 
are  impossible.      Thus,  it  is    impossible  for  God 
to   lie,  because   he  is  a  God  of  immutable  truth : 
it  is  also  impossible  he  should  do   any  thing  cruel, 
unjust,  foolish,  or  zcicked,  because  he  is    merciful, 
just,  ivise  and  good.     From  this  consideration,  tKat 
if  he  does  any  thing  cruel,  unjust,  foolish,  and  wick- 
ed, it  contradicts,  and  totally  annihilates  his  good- 
ness, justice,  wisdom,  &c.  the  doctrine  of  universal 
and  irresistible  decrees  is  proved  false  ;    because 
that  doctrine  supposes  all  foolish  and  wirk;  J  ac- 
x 


242  LETTER  V. 

tions  are  brought  to  pass  by  the  Almighty.  It 
may,  however,  be  said,  u  That  if  a  believer  may  so 
fall  away  as  to  perish,  the  faithfulness  of  God  fails.*' 
To  this  it  is  answered,  that  the  faithfulness  of  God 
is  demonstrated,  in  accomplishing  all  his  promises. 
These  promises  are  conditional.  If  ye  repent,  if 
ye  believe,  if  ye  endure,  &c.  If  we  fail  to  fulfil 
the  conditions,  God's  faithfulness  does  not  fail,  but. 
the  failure  is  on  our  part.  Matter  of  fact  will  best 
establish  and  illustrate  this  idea.  God  made  pro- 
mise to  the  enslaved  Israelites  that  he  would  give 
them  the  land  of  Canaan  for  their  possession  ;  but 
the  sequel  of  their  history  proves  that  only  two  of 
all  those  who  came  out  of  Egypt,  experienced  the 
fulfilment  of  this  promise.  Did  God's  faithfulness 
fail  in  this  instance  ?  By  no  means.  But  the  faith- 
fulness of  the  people  failing,  God  was  under  no  ob- 
ligation, not  even  from  his  faithfulness,  to  accom- 
plish his  promise.  The  sentiments  here  expressed 
are  beautifully  confirmed  by  that  passage  in  Jere- 
miah, which  unfolds  the  general  method  by  which 
God  deals  with  nations,  communities  and  individu- 
als. "  At  what  instant  I  shall  speak  concerning  a 
nation,  and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to  pluck  up, 
and  to  pull  down,  and  destroy  it ;  if  that  nation 
against  whom  I  have  pronounced,  turn  from  their 
evil,  I  will  repent  of  the  evil  that  I  thought  to  do  un- 
to them.  And  at  what  instant  I  shall  speak  con- 
cerning a  nation,  and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to 
build  and  to  plant  it,  if  it  do  evil  in  my  sight,  that 
it  obey   not  my  voice,  then  I  will  repent  of  the 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        243 

good  wherewith  I  said  I  would  benefit  them,"    Jer. 
xviii.  7 — 10.     See  also  the  book  of  Jonah. 

6.  You  ask,  "  Is  it  not  more  to  the  honour  of 
Christ — to  perfect  the  begun  cure,  than  to  begin  the 
healing,  and  still  let  them  die  in  their  sins  ?"  p.  119. 
To  this  question  we  answer,  yes,  if  the  believing 
soul  persevere  in  well  doing.  And  therefore  your 
doctrine  respecting  the  necessary  continuance  of 
sin,  "  especially  as  it  respects  the  heart/'  is  high- 
ly  dishonourable  to  God.  But  you  ask  this  ques- 
tion to  prove  that  all  in  whom  a  good  work  has 
been  begun,  shall  infallibly  persevere  to  the  end. 
Did  not  the  Lord  begin  a  good  work  in  the  heart  of 
Saul,  the  king  of  Israel,  when  he  gave  him  another 
heart?  And  did  not  Saul  afterwards  forsake  follow- 
ing the  Lord  ?  Did  he  not  begin  a  good  work 
in  the  heart  of  Jndas  ?  Or,  was  his  call  to  the 
ministry  a  bad  work  ?  And  was  this  good  work  per- 
fected ?  Or  did  not  Judas  rather  quench  the  Spirit 
by  indulging  covetous  desires,  which  led  him  on  to 
treachery  and  a  permature  death  ?  And  Hymenus, 
Philetus,  and  Alexander,  did  not  the  Lord  begin  a 
good  work  in  their  hearts  ?  And  yet  they  made  ship- 
wreck of  faith  and  a  good  conscience.  If  the  "  intro- 
duction of  sin  into  the  system  has  proved,  and 
shall  prove — the  occasion  of  great  good"  (p.  120) 
in  regard  to  the  first  apostacy,  why  may  not  apos- 
tacy  among  God's  redeemed  creatures,  be  the  cause 
of  great  good  also?  The  same  cause  will  produce 
the  same  effect..  And  if  sin  was  the  occasion  of 
^reat  good  once  in  the  "  hands  of  a  wise  and  holy 


244  LETTER  V. 

God,"  why  may  not  a  repetition  of  the  same  crimes 
be  productive  of  similar  effects  ? 

7.  In  the  application  of  your  discourse,  in  which^ 
you  enumerate  the  utility  of  your  doctrine,  you  con- 
clude that  your's  is  the  only  system  which  leads  be- 
lievers to   trust  in  Jesus  Christ  for  strength  and 
support.      Whereas  we  no  more  teach  people  to 
trust  in  any  "  innate  or  imparted  strength"  of  our 
own,  nor  in  "  frames  and  feelings"    for  salvation, 
than  Paul  did  when  he  said,  "  This  is  our  rejoicing, 
the  testimony  of  our  conscience,  that  in  simplicity 
.;md  godly  sincerity,  we  have  had  our  conversation 
in  the  world."     A  friend  says  to  a  drowning  man, 
*'  Hold  fast  to  my  hand,  and  I  will  draw  you  from 
the  water."     Does  the  drowning  man  "  save  him- 
self"  in  this  instance,  or  does  his  friend  deliver 
him  ?  So  the   Lord  Jesus  saith  to  sinners,  Repent, 
believe,  love  and  obey,  to  the  end  of  your  pilgrim- 
age, and  you  shall  have  everlasting  life — /  will  give 
■jou  a  crown  of  life.     To  say  that  this  doctrine  leads- 
to  selfishness  and  to  self-dependence,  is  to  impeach 
die  Lord  Jesus,  who  is  the  author  of  it,  with  teach- 
ing mankind  to  trust  in  themselves.     The   scrip- 
:wvq  doctrine  of  perseverance,  which  we  advocate, 
asserts,  that  the  grace  of  repentance,  the  power  to 
believe,  and  the  ability  to  love  and  obey,   are  all 
gratuitously   bestowed  upon  man;   so   that,  were 
they  withheld,  no  one  could  make  his  calling  and 
election  sure.     Every   considerate  mind  will    per- 
ceive that  this  doctrine  secures  to  Jesus  Christ  the 
honour  of  giving  eternal  life  to  believers,  and  fixes 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        245 

the  shame  of  eternal  death  upon  unbelievers  them- 
selves, which  your  new-fangled  scheme  charges 
upon  God,  which  says,  he  fore-ordained  their  guilt 
and  condemnation  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world. 

8.  You  likewise  endeavour  to  shew  the  comfort 
which  your  doctrine  affords  to  believers.  And  it. 
is  granted,  that,  if  it  presented  any  infallible  marks 
by  which  a  person  might  assure  himself  he  is  a  true 
believer,  he  might  derive  some  comfort  from  the 
consideration  that  he  shall  be  finally  happy.  But 
if  I  mistake  not,  your  doctrine  affords  no  such  evi* 
dence  to  the  believing  mind,  except  it  be  his  doubts, 
fears,  and  sinfulness;  for  you  say,  p.  117,  "the 
holding  out  in  a  profession  to  the  end  of  life,  is  no 
decided  proof  in  our  favour."  And  in  page  78,  you 
suppose  the  penitent  sinner  to  say,  "  My  conviction 
is  no  proof  that  I  am  to  be  converted."  Is  this 
doctrine  comforting  ?  According  to  your  "  view  of 
the  doctrine"  of  election  and  perseverance,  no  one 
can  have  any  satisfactory  evidence  that  he  is  a 
Christian  this  side  the  grave.  For  in  order  to  know 
that  he  is  one  of  the  elect,  he  must  first  persevere 
to  the  end ;  because  backsliding,  or  "  Not  holding 
out  to  the  end,  in  the  profession  of  godliness,  is  a 
decided  proof  that  he  never  hnew  the  grace  of  God 
in  truth,"  p.  117.  And  if  a  man  does  not  know 
himself  one  of  the  elect,  how  can  he  take  any  com- 
fort from  the  promises  ?  A  reprobate  certainly  can- 
not derive  solid  comfort  from  the  general  promises 
of  eternal  life,  even  though  he  should  believe  him- 
x  2 


241,  LETTER  V. 

self  elected.  According  to  your  notion,  therefore, 
all  that  the  best  can  do  in  this  life,  is  to  conjecture. 
And  is  it  comforting  to  have  the  soul  continually 
harrassed  with  doubts  and  fears,  and  to  be  labour- 
ing under  the  galling  yoke  of  sin  all  one's  days  ? 
It  is  true  you  tell  us  that  "  Christ's  real  friends  love 
him,  and  keep  his  commandments  ;"  but  at  another 
lime  you  earnestly  contend  that  no  one  does  keep 
jiis  commandments,  but  doth  "  always  sin  in  deed, 
word  and  thought."  From  these  contradictory  as- 
sertions, what  is  the  supposed  Christian  to  conclude? 
He  cannot  believe  in  both  propositions  ;  and  there- 
fore it  must  be  extremely  difficult,  if  not  utterly  im- 
possible, to  determine  whether  he  be  a  "  real 
friend"  to  Christ,  or  only  a  boasting  hypocrite. — 
If  he  were  to  believe  in  the  first,  that  he  loves  God, 
and  keeps  his  commandments,  he  would  no  longer 
be  a  Hopkinsian  ;  and  therefore,  although  he  might 
enjoy  comfort,  it  would  not  be  in  consequence  of 
believing  in  your  doctrine.  If  he  believes  in  the 
ialler,  that  he  "  always  sins,"  he  could  have  no 
just  criterion  to  distinguish  between  his  own  char- 
acter, and  the  character  of  a  reprobate  ;  for  the  re- 
probate cannot  do  worse  than  sin  "  always  in  deed, 
word  and  thought."  So  that,  view  your  doctrine 
which  way  soever  we  may,  it  exhibits  a  dark  and 
melancholy  cloud  to  the  human  mind.  Not  so  the 
doctrines  of  Christianity.  They  declare  that 
lie  that  believtth  hath  the  witness  in  himself — that, 
the  Spirit  itself  beareth  witness  with  their  spirits,  that 
:he>i  are  the  children  of  God — That  they  may  knozo 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        14T 

they  have  passed  from  death  unto  life, because  they  love 
the  brethren.  And  if  any  should  be  sincerely  mis- 
taken respecting  their  present  attainments,  they  are 
exhorted  to  search  diligently  into  their  own  hearts, 
and  never  to  rest  satisfied  until  they  have  a  satis- 
factory evidence  of  their  acceptance  in  the  beloved — 
Until  they  have  an  assurance  of  that  peace  of  God 
which  passeth  all  human  understanding.  They 
are  authorised  to  believe,  that  Christ  who  is  their 
life,  is  abundantly  able,  and  willing  to  save  them 
to  the  uttermost,  even  from  all  their  sins,  and  to 
perfect  them  in  love — That  he  is  both  able  and 
willing  to  keep  them  from  falling,  (if  they  turn  not 
again  to  folly)  and  to  give  them  an  abundant  en- 
trance into  the  everlasting  kingdom  of  God, 

9.  Your  doctrine  is  as  dangerous  as  it  is  comfort- 
less. If  the  first  act  of  divine  grace  is  believed  to 
be  justification,  and  if,  after  a  sinner  has  expe- 
rienced light  and  conviction,  he  rests  satisfied,  be- 
lieving he  cannot  so  fall  as  to  perish,  and  if  he 
should  be  mistaken  in  his  conclusion  respecting  his 
experience,  (which  I  think  you  will  allow  is  possi- 
ble that  he  may  be) — Admitting,  I  say,  this  to  be 
the  case,  such  a  man  is  in  iminent  danger  of  eternal 
perJition.  That  your  doctrine  has  this  deceptive 
influence  is  evident ;  because  you  suppose  all  who 
are  c  flectually  called,  are  justified,  and  wrill  be  event- 
ually glorified.  But  if  you  say  it  is  not  possible  a 
man  can  be  mistaken  in  regard  to  his  call  and  ex- 
perience, you  thereby  nulify  all  the  cautions  given 
in  scripture  against  deception  ;  and  also  overthrow 


248  LETTER  V. 

all  you  have  said  respecting  deceivers  and  being 
deceived.  If  a  man  then  has  one  good  desire  after 
holiness,  he  is,  according  to  your  notion,  sure  of 
heaven.  Is  not  this  daubing  sinners  with  untem- 
pered  mortar,  in  the  most  important  sense  of  the 
word?  Moreover,  by  telling  believers  that  they 
must  live  in  sin  all  the  days  of  their  lives;  that 
they  may  indulge  in  pride,  impenitence,  unbelief, 
or  any  other  heart  sin  ;  or  plunge  into  adultery, 
lying,  and  cheating,  without  endangering  their  sal- 
vation ;  and  if  after  all,  that  doctrine  should  prove 
false,  they  are  irretrievably  gone.  And  the  many 
serious  cautions  which  are  given  in  scripture 
against  apestacy,  renders  it  extremely  probable, 
(and  in  my  mind  leaves  no  doubt)  that  one  who  is 
a  believer  now,  may,  through  disobedience,  so 
fall  as  to  perish.  So  that  there  is  not  only  a  pos- 
sibility, but  a  strong  probability  in  favour  of  our  sen- 
timent. On  this  subject  we  may  reason  as  Saurki 
does  against  infidelity.  If  there  zrefive  probabili- 
ties in  favour  of  your  sentiment,  and  only  one  in  fa- 
vour of  ours,  reason  dictates  that  ours  should  be 
embraced  ;  for  if  the  one  probability  supposed  to 
be  in  our  favour  should  prove  an  ihipos«ibiluy,i.  e. 
if  our  doctrine  should  be  found  erroneous,  yours 
will  hold  us;  but  if  your  five  probabilities  should 
fail,  while  the  believer  is  indulging  in  sin,  accord- 
ing to  the  licence  your  doctrine  gives  him,  he  is 
gone  forever.  The  reasoq  ^  this  will  appear  evi- 
dent to  every  one  who  recollects,  that  we  teach  the 
necessity  of  justification  by  grace  through  faith — 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.         249 

that  we  must  have  the  faith  which  works  by  love, 
and  purifies  the  heart — that  we  must  press  on  to  the 
perfection  of  love,  and  be  saved  from  all  sin,  pro- 
perly so  called.  Now  if  a  soul  attain  to  justification, 
if  the  doctrine  of  infallible  perseverance  be  true, 
he  is  safe.  His  being  cautioned  against  falling, 
cannot  endanger  his  salvation.  But  if  that  doc- 
trine should  prove  false,  and  yet  the  justified  be- 
liever should  cease  to  persevere,  the  consequence  is 
fatal.  It  is  not,  however,  hereby  granted,  that 
there  arc  five  probabilities  in  favour  of  your  doc- 
trine to  one  in  favour  of  ours.  This  instance  is 
produced  to  shew  the  dangerous  tendency  of  youi1 
system. 

10.  But  this  is  not  all.  It  also  renders  useless  a 
great  part  of  the  Bible ;  for  it  must  be  admitted  that 
there  are  innumerable  places,  where  the  condition 
of  salvation  is  expressed.  Such  as,  If  ye  endure — 
Be  thou  faithful — If  ye  hold  fast  the  beginning  of 
your  confidence  to  the  end — Strive  to  enter  in  at  the 
strait  gate — If  ye  do  these  things,  ye  shall  never 
fall — If  these  things  be  in  you  and  abound.  We 
have  also  a  great  many  cautions,  Quench  not  the 
Spirit — Take  heed  lest  there  be  in  any  of  you  an  evil 
heart  of  unbelief  in  departing  from  the  living  God — 
Lest  any  man  fall  after  the  same  example  of  unbe- 
lief— Repent,  and  do  your  first  works,  else  I  will 
fight  against  you  with  the  sword  of  my  mouth. — 
If  there  be  no  possibility  of  final  apostacy,  all  these 
conditions,  to  the  performers  of  which  the  promise 
is  made  ;  and  all  these  cautions  are  entirelv  useless; 


250  LETTER  V. 

And  a  doctrine  which  nulifies  so  great  part  of  the 
Bible  cannot  be  scriptural.  Such  are  some  of  the 
unhappy  consequences  which  result  from  your  doc- 
trine of  unconditional  perseverance  ;  and  taken  to- 
gether they  are  sufficient  to  awaken  a  suspicion  in 
the  mind  respecting  their  truth.  While  the  believer 
is  thus  cautioned  against  apostacy,  he  is  also  en- 
couraged to  persevere  in  the  path  of  obedience  by 
the  promises  of  an  eternal  inheritance.  So  far  from 
leaving  him  in  the  dreary  wilderness  of  sin,  and  in 
the  disconsolate  maze  of  doubts  and  fears,  darkness 
and  unbelief,  he  is  prompted  to  go  forth  into  the 
land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey,  where  faith  is  in 
luminous  exercise,  where  holy  filial  fear  operates 
as  a  check  to  presumption,  where  the  light  of  God's 
countenance  dissipates  the  clouds  of  darkness,  and 
where  the  soul  delightfully  ranges  from  field  to 
field,  feeding  in  the  rich  pastures  of  redeeming  love. 
'-  The  path  of  the  just  is  as  a  shining  light,  shining 
more  and  more  to  the  perfect  day."  To  the  be- 
lieving soul  we  say,  Press  on  to  the  fulness  of  per- 
fect love — to  the  doubting,  Hold  fast  whereunto  ye 
have  attained,  watch  and  pray  until  Christ  speaks 
to  your  souls  in  accents  of  love — to  the  penitent, 
He  that  cometh  to  Christ,  shall  not  be  cast  out — all 
things  are  possible  to  him  that  believeth.  Believe 
therefore  in  his  power  and  goodness  to  save  you 
riow — to  the  halting  backslider,  Return,  ye  back- 
sliding children,  and  the  Lord  will  love  you  freely, 
and  heal  all  your  backslidings — to  the  impenitent 
sinner,  Repent  and  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  and 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GRACE.        m 

diou  shalt  be  saved ;  for  he  that  believeth  not  shall 
be  damned.  Is  not  this  scriptural  doctrine  suited 
to  every  character,  and  full  of  comfort  to  believers, 
as  well  as  terror  to  unbelievers  ? 

11.  P.  1  25.  This  doctrine  is  of  use  to  excite  the 
unbelieving  world  to  pay  attention  to  gospel  invi- 
tations. We  find  it  applied  to  this  use  in  the  5'5th 
<  hapter  of  Isaiah.  Were  you  afraid  to  quote  this 
passage  lest  your  readers  should  differ  from  you 
respecting  its  import  ?  "  Hearken  diligently  unto 
me,"  saith  the  Lord  by  the  Prophet,  "  and  eat  ye 
that  which  is  good,  and  let  your  soul  delight  itself 
In  fatness.  Incline  your  car,  and  come  unto  me  ; 
hear,  and  your  soul  shall  live  ;  and  I  will  make  an 
everlasting  covenant  with  you,  even  the  sure  mer- 
cies of  David.'5  It  is  somewhat  extraordinary  that 
a  text  which  hath  no  less  than  six  conditions  ex- 
pressed  in  it,  should  be  produced  to  prove  an  im- 
conditional  perseverance  to  eternal  life !  On  the 
latter  part  of  this  text  I  have  before  made  some  re- 
marks, see  p.  231,  of  this  work.  In  addition  to 
what  is  there  said,  it  may  be  observed,  that  those 
with  whom  the  Lord  promised  to  make  an  everlast- 
ing covenant,  arc  1.  To  hearken  diligently — 2.  To 
eat  that  which  is  good.  Is  committing  adultery  as 
David  did,  worshipping  idols  as  did  Solomon, 
making  shipwreck  of  faith  and  a  good  conscience, 
as  did  Hymenus  and  Philetus,  loving  this  present 
world,  as  Demas,  and  feeding  on  indwelling  sin,  as 
you  say  all  believers  do,  is  this  eating  that  which  is 
good?     3.  Let  your  soul  delight  itself  in  fatness — 


252  LETTER  V. 

Do  you  suppose  the  prophet  meant  that  they  could 
not  forfeit  the  sure  mercies  of  David  "  even  by 
their  own  folly  ?"  (p.  187.)  Is  backsliding  from  God, 
the  fatness  which  the  prophet  called  upon  the  peo- 
ple to  delight  in  I  Indeed,  the  text  under  conside- 
ration is  as  full  a  confutation  of  your  unscriptural 
doctrine,  as  is  to  be  found  in  all  the  Bible.  But 
perhaps  you  think  that  because  the  covenant  is  cal- 
led an  everlasting  covenant,  your  doctrine  is  con- 
tained in  it.  This,  however,  does  not  follow.  For 
we  read  in  Isa.  xxv.  5.  u  The  earth  also  is  defiled 
with  the  inhabitants  thereof;  because  they  have 
transgressed  the  laws,  changed  the  ordinances, 
broken  the  everlasting  covenant."  So  that  a  cove- 
nant being  called  everlasting,  does  not  necessarily 
suppose  that  its  blessings  may  not  be  forfeited,  by 
not  fulfilling  its  conditions.  The  covenant  of  grace 
remains  immutably  the  same,  through  all  the  vicis- 
situdes of  human  frailty  ;  but  if  human,  responsible 
agents  refuse  to  comply  with  its  invariable  condi- 
tions, they  must  not  expect  to  enjoy  its  promised 
blessings.  On  the  whole,  we  may  safely  conclude 
that  your  doctrine  of  infallible  and  unconditional 
perseverance,  hath  no  foundation  in  scripture. 

12.  "  No  foundation  in  scripture  !"  do  you  say — 
*'•  Does  not  the  scripture  say,  '  My  sheep  hear  my 
voice,  and  I  know  them,  and  they  follow  me.  And 
I  give  unto  them  eternal  life  ;  and  they  shall  never 
perish,  neither  shall  any  pluck  them  out  of  my 
hand.' "  True — But  do  you  suppose  this  text 
proves  unconditional  perseverance  ?  You  might  as 


ON  FALLING  FROM  GJIACE.        253 

well  undertake  to  prove  transubstantiation,  because 
Christ  said,  /  am  the  bread  of  life,  as  to  prove  youv 
doctrine  of  infallible  perseverance  from  the  above 
words.  Mark  the  conditions  on  which  eternal  life 
is  promised.  1 .  They  hear  my  voice.  For  not  com- 
plying with  this  condition,  the  disobedient  arc 
threatened  with  everlasting  destruction — /  have 
called,  but  ye  have  refused.  2.  /  know  them,  that  is, 
/  approve  of  them,  because  they  hear  my  voice,  and 
prepare  to  follow  me.  Having  hearkened  to  the 
voice  of  Christ,  and  prepared  themselves,  like  sol- 
diers who  attend  to  the  command  of  their  general, 
and  appear  upon  the  field  in  full  uniform,  when  in- 
spected they  are  approved.  Then,  in  the  third 
place,  They  follow  me.  But  we  read  of  some, 
who,  when  our  Lord  preached  his  self-denying  doc- 
trine to  them,  forsook  him,  and  no  longer  followed 
him,  insomuch  that  Jesus  turned  to  his  Apostles 
and  said,  Will  ye  also  go  away?  To  follow  Jesus 
Christ,  it  is  necessary  to  take  up  the  cross  daily, 
and  persevere  to  the  end  of  life  in  well-doing.  To 
such  as  do  this,  Christ  makes  the  promise  of  eternal 
life. 

"  But  if  Christ  gives  them  eternal  life,  how  can 
it  be  lost  ?  Can  that  which  is  eternal,  perish !"  No, 
no  more  than  gold  can  perish.  But  because  you 
have  a  piece  of  gold,  which  is  imperishable  in  its 
nature,  does  it  follow  that  you  cannot  lose  it  ?  By  no 
means.  You  may  dispossess  yourself  of  it.  al- 
though it  is  still  in  existence  somewhere.  To  know 
God  is   said  to  be  eternal  life.     And  yet  we  read 

Y 


254  LETTER  V. 

of  some,  who,  "  when  they  knew  God,  glorified  hnn 
not  as  God,  but  became  vain  in  their  imaginations, 
and  their  foolish  hearts  were  darkened."  The 
promise  of  eternal  life  is  made  to  obedient,  perse- 
vering believers  ;  to  those  who  hear  the  voice  of 
Christ,  who  conduct  themselves  in  such  a  manner 
as  to  be  approved  by  him,  and  who  follow  him  in 
the  narrow  way  of  self-denial.  Such  are  in  no  dan- 
ger of  perishing.  To  such  the  promise  will  be  in- 
fallibly accomplished.  None  shall  pluck  such 
souls  from  the  hands  of  Christ.  The  holy  Trinity  is 
engaged  to  keep  all  such  from  falling  ;  and  they  shall 
finally  inherit  everlasting  life  at  God's  right  hand. 
This  is  the  comfort  of  the  believer,  that  nothing  shall 
harm  him,  if  he  be  a  follower  of  that  zvhich  is  good. 
It  is  not  by  his  own  strength  that  he  stands,  but  by 
the  power  of  God — that  God  who  has  pledged  him- 
self to  defend  them  against  the  power  and  malice 
of  their  enemies,  to  console  their  minds  in  the 
midst  of  their  temptations  and  afflictions,  and  to 
strengthen  them  in  the  inward  man  to  do  his  will. — 
Fulfil  the  condition,  and  the  promise  is  sure. 

i;  Let"  then  il  him  that  thinketh  he  slandeth 
take  heed  lest  he  fall.  Behold  the  goodness  and 
severity  of  God;  on  them  which  fell,  severity  ;  but 
toward  thee  goodness,  if  thou  continue  in  his  good- 
ness ;  otherwise  thou  shalt  be  cut  off."  If  the  be- 
liever persevere  in  obedient  faith  and  humble  love, 
God  has  pledged  himself  to  be  his  defence  by  night 
an/1  by  day.     To  such  it  may  be  said,  jVo  weapon 


ON  PALLING  FROM  GRACE.        25S 

that  is  formed  against  them  shall  prosper.  They 
may  triumphantly  say,  We  are  more  than  conquerors 
through  him  that  loved  us. 

That  we  may  so  pursue  in  the  path  of  righteous- 
ness,  that  an  abundant  entrance  into  the  everlast- 
ing kingdom  may  be  administered  unto  us,  is,  dear 
sir,  the  prayer  of  yours,  &c. 

N.  BANGS. 

Rev.  S.  Willistox,  Durham.  ,V.  Y. 

Rhinebec*.  Mtiy  24,  l?A: . 


LETTER  YJ. 


ANIMADVERSIONS    ON     MR.    WILLISTO.V3    SERMON     ON 

THE    MINISTERS    OF     SATAN TlIE    NECESSITY     OF 

THE    WITNESS     OF     THE     SPIRIT  ;    AND     SOME     RE- 
MARKS   ON    DISINTERESTED    BENEVOLENCE,  &C. 


Rev,  Sir. 

1.  IXAVING  attended  to  the  five  points  which 
were  debated,  I  might  now  dismiss  the  controversy, 
only  it  seems  necessary  to  make  some  remarks  upon 
what  you  have  said  concerning  Satan's  transforming 
himself  into  an  Angel  of  light.  Passing  over  what 
you  say  respecting  his  character,  I  come  to  your 
improvement,  where  you  very  justly  assert,  p.  192, 
"  Satan  has  his  religion  as  well  as  his  irreligion  in 
the  world.'1  You  then  proceed  in  p.  194,  to  speak 
of  Satan' 's  ministers  ;  but  what  is  very  extraordina  • 
ry,  in  p.  195  you  gravely  tell  your  audience,  ';  no 
rules  can  be  laid  down,  by  which  the  hearers  can 
with  certainty  distinguish  between  a  sanctitied  and 
an  unsanctified  minister  ;"  and  yet,  astonishing  to 
tell,  a  few  lines  below  you  assert,  "  And  this  was 
a  distinguishing  characteristic  of  them,  that  they 
prophesied  smooth  things,1'  and  also  quote  our 
Lord's  words,  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them, — * 
Y  2 


25B  LETTER  VI. 

Now  I  should  suppose  that  Satan's  ministers  would 
resemble  him  in  some  instances  at  least.  And  he 
is  unquestionably  a  propagator  of  error.  But  how 
are  we  to  distinguish  between  truth  and  error.— 
Truth  is  like  a  straight  line,  while  error  is  self-con- 
tradictory. You  say,  u  No  rule  can  be  laid  down 
by  which"  Satan's  ministers  can  be  distinguished  ; 
and  then  proceed  to  give  us  a  "  distinguishing  char- 
acteristic of  them?"  Which  side  of  this  contradiction 
is  true,  and  which  false  ?  for  it  is  morally  impossi- 
ble they  should  both  be  true.  If  no  rule  can  be 
given  by  which  false  ministers  are  known,  how  is  it 
that  you  attempt  to  describe  them  ?  Did  you  in  that 
instance  work  without  rule  ?  Or  did  Satan  deceive 
you  while  composing  that  discourse  ? 

2.  I  think  we  have  an  infallible  criterion  by 
which  we  may  distinguish  between  the  doctrines  of 
Satan,  and  the  doctrines  of  truth ;  and  it  is  natural 
to  suppose  that  Satan's  ministers  will  propagate 
his  doctrine.  The  first  account  we  have  of  his  doc- 
trine is  recorded  Gen.  iii.  1 — 5.  "  And  the  serpent 
said  unto  the  woman,  ye  shall  not  surely  die.  For 
God  doth  know,  that  in  the  day  ye  eat  thereof,  then 
your  eyes  shall  be  opened,  and  ye  shall  be  as  gods, 
knowing  good  and  evil."  Adam  and  Eve  were  at 
this  time  in  the  favour  of  God,  possessing  his  image, 
and  enjoying  all  the  fruits  of  paradise,  one  tree  ex- 
cepted, which  was  interdicted  on  pain  of  death. — 
The  devil  admitted  the  prohibition,  but  denied  the 
consequence  resulting  from  disobedience.  May 
we  conclude  that  his  ministers  imitate  him  in  this 


ANLMADVERSIONS,  &c,  259 

respect  ?  You  acknowledge  that  God  has  forbidden 
sin  ;  and  that  he  has  made  it  our  duty,  and  conse- 
quently commanded  us  to  be  holy  even  as  he  is  holy  ; 
And  you  assert  that  a  believer  does  sin  in  "  deed, 
word,  and  thought," — that,  although  he  thus  "  al- 
ways sins,"  it  by  no  means  endangers  his  salva- 
tion, notwithstanding  it  is  prohibited  under  the  se- 
verest penalties  ?  Satan  enumerated  the  benefits 
which  should  result  from  partaking  of  the  forbidden 
fruit,  which  were  two — 1.  Their  eyes  should  be  open- 
ed. 2.  They  should  be  as  gods,  knowing  good  and  evil. 
In  this  respect  you  have  gone  far  beyond  him,  for 
you  have  enumerated  Jive  benefits  which  flow  from 
sin  in  the  hearts  and  lives  of  Christians.  See  Ser- 
mon 4.  p.  88 — 93.  So  far  you  have  the  honour  of 
agreeing  with  Satan  in  the  most  prominent  features 
of  his  doctrine.  And  in  this  respect,  also  you  are 
equally  pointed  in  contradicting  the  awful  declara- 
tions of  the  Most  High.  He  says,  The  soul  that 
sinncth  it  shall  die — but  you  say  indwelling  sin  shall 
make  the  soul  eternally  more  penitent  and  thankful 
in  heaven !  God  saith,  /  have  no  pleasure  in  the 
death  of  the  wicked — You  say,  he  hath  decreed  every 
event  that  ever  did,  or  ever  will  take  place,  and 
that  his  decrees  are  according  to  his  pleasure.  Now 
among  the  multifarious  events  which  take  place, 
the  death  of  the  wicked  is  one,  which  you  say,  is 
according  to  God's  pleasure ;  whereas  he  saith,  / 
have  no  pleasure  in  it.  Is  this  a  "  distinguishing 
characteristic"  of  a  minister  of  Satan ,  to  contradict 
the  Almighty ! ! 


260  LETTER  VI. 

3.  In  regard  to  the  religion  of  Satan,  it  doubtless- 
assimilates  itself  more  or  less  to  the  doctrine  he 
teaches.  And  we  have  seen  that  it  is  an  effect  of 
his  subtlety  to  acknowledge  part  of  the  truth,  in  or- 
der to  make  way  for  his  falsehood  :  so  we  may  ex- 
pect that  he  will  teach  the  necessity  of  some  good, 
or  otherwise  he  could  not  so  easily  deceive.  It  is 
highly  probable  therefore  that  his  ministers  will 
assert  that  "  sinning  is  not  the  whole  a  good  man 
doeth ;  he  also  doeth  good,  and  is  possessed  of  a 
good  heart,"  p.  101.  Such  a  remark  would  be 
quite  seasonable,  if  it  had  been  previously  affirmed 
that  every  man  "  always  sins  in  deed,  word,  and 
thought ;"  otherwise  the  reader  might  suppose  that 
"  sinning  was  the  whole  which  a  good  man"  did. — 
I  know  not  how  Satan  could  devise  a  more  decep- 
tive religion.  Some  good  is  admitted  to  make  it  ap- 
pear somewhat  like  the  righteous  religion  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  ;  but  much  sin  is  insisted  upon,  to  make 
it  congenial  to  the  depraved  taste  of  fallen  man. — 
If  mankind  are  fond  of  a  religion  suited  to  their  sin- 
ful nature,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  they  will  seek 
one  that  permits  them  to  foster  the  evils  of  their 
heart,  such  as  "  pride,  self-seeking,  hardness  of 
heart,  unbelief,"  &c.  If  the  reader  wishes  to  see  a 
description  of  such  a  system  of  religion,  he  may  find 
it  painted  to  the  life  in  your  sermon  on  u  sinful  im- 
perfection." In  this  respect,  I  think  you  have,  I 
hope  undesignedly,  given  a  dangerous  stroke  to  the 
pure  and  umlejiled  religion  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  But 
]by  admitting  the   truth  of  one  of  your  remarks, 


ANIMADVERSIONS,  &c.  J(ii 

which  I  shall  not,  at  present,  controvert,  you  may- 
be acquitted  from  designing  any  mischief;  for  you 
say,  "  Satan  when  transformed  into  an  Angel  of 
light,  has  not  deceived  himself," — "  but  his  minis- 
ters may  be,  and  often  are,  self-deceived,"  p.  194. 
If  this  be  so,  you  may  be  "  self-deceived" — and  by 
admitting  the  truth  of  another  peculiar  trait  of  your 
system,  you  may  also  be  absolved  from  all  blame — 
I  mean  that  which  saith  "  God  deceives,  blinds, 
and  hardens  people."  But  notwithstanding  all 
your  "  apparent"  zeal  for  God,  so  far  as  you  have 
been  engaged  in  preaching  in  favour  of  sin,  and 
have  thus  aided  the  cause  of  Satan,  it  would  not  do 
to  transfer  your  fault  to  God,  who  is  of  too  pure 
eyes  to  behold  iniquity. 

4.  It  appears  also  to  be  the  work  of  Satan  t© 
make  people  believe  a  lit*  To  effect  this,  we  may 
suppose  he  would  excite  ministers  to  make  repro- 
bates believe  that  Christ  died  for  them,  that  they 
might  not  see  the  injustice  of  their  condemnation. — 
This,  it  is  confessed,  would  be  a  difficult  task ; 
first,  to  make  them  believe  that  "  just  so  many" 
were,  from  all  eternity,  reprobated  ;  and  secondly, 
that  Christ  died  to  atone  for  their  sins  that  they 
might  be  saved!  If  Satan  can  infuse  sophistical 
subtlety  enough  into  any  man  to  enable  him  to  per- 
suade people  to  believe  this,  he  will  prove  himself 
one  of  the  most  consummate  artists  in  deception 
imaginable.  And  in  this  case,  I  think  you  yourself 
would  be  willing  to  admit  that  there  is  one  thing 


262  LETTER  VI. 

brought  about  by  Satan,  and  no  longet  insist  that 
"  every  thing  is  brought  to  pass  by  the  Almighty."* 
5.  Another  attempt  of  Satan,  one  would  suppose, 
would  be  to  slander  the  ministers  of  Christ,  by 
calling  them  false  apostles,  deceitful  workers,  &c. 
in  order  thereby  to  circumscribe  their  usefulness. 
And  as  you  justly  assert,  he  generally  appears  in  dis- 
guise, it  is  not  to  be  concluded  he  will  come  out 
plain,  but  rather  influence  some  minister,  under  the 
garb  of  friendship,  to  give  some  broad  hints,  and 
secret  stabs,  that  his  design  may  not  be  discovered. 
If  any  such  ministers  should  live  in  a  country  where 
there  are  no  professors  of  idolatry,  no  Mohami- 
dans,  and  but  few  Papists,  he  might  summons  up 
courage  enough  to  pronounce  positively,  (although 
"  no  rule  can  be  given  to  know  certainly")  that  Poly- 
theism, Mohamidism,  and  Popery  are  all  supported 
by  "  ministers  of  Satan," — yet  he  dare  not  come 

out  plainly  and  honestly,  and  revile  the  true  minis- 

I 

*  P.  190.  "  In  this  snare,  he"  (Satan)  "has,  no  doubt,  caught, 
and  destroyed  thousands  of  immortal  souls."  Is  it  not  truly  sur- 
prising, that  Satan  should  be  accused  of  ruining  souls,  by  one, 
who  so  strenously  maintains  that  God  had  unchangably  secur- 
ed their  destruction  before  they  came  into  existence  !  What 
souls  does  Satan  destroy  ?  not  the  elect  certainly.  And  as  to 
the  reprobates,  they  were  never  in  a  salvable  state.  It  is 
presumed  that  the  destruction  of  "  thousands  of  immortal 
souls"  is  an  event — and  you  say  all  events  are  brought  to  pass 
by  the  Almighty.  What  then  has  Satan  to  do  in  producing 
such  an  awful  event,  as  the  destruction  of  thousands  of  souls, 
So  forcible  are  right  words*  that  let  a  man  defend  error  never 
so  zealously,  they  will  lead  him  sometimes  to  contradict  it, 


ANIMADVERSIONS,  &c.  2G3 

ters  of  Christ,  by  calling  them  ministers  of  Satan,, 
ibr  fear  of  giving  offence,  and  thereby  lose  his  popu- 
larity. But  under  the  disguise  of  friendship,  and  of 
great  concern  for  fear  they  should  deceive  some  of 
those  who  he  thinks  were  from  all  eternity  elected 
to  everlasting  life,  and  therefore  beyond  the  influ- 
ence of  such  deception  as  can  endanger  their  salva- 
tion, he  modestly  hints  they  are  ministers  of  Satan. 
He  designs,  however,  that  his  hints  should  be  un- 
derstood. 

^[Perhaps,  it  might  be  thought,  an  apology  is  due 
for  the  pointed  manner  in  which  the  preceding  re- 
marks are  made.  I  do  not  design  them  to  apply 
indiscriminately  to  the  Hopkinsian  ministers ;  for  I 
doubt  not  but  there  arc  many  worthy  men  of  that 
order.  ,  Neither  would  I  insinuate  that  Mr.  Willis- 
ton  is  a  wicked  minister  of  Satan.  From  the  smaH 
and  superficial  acquaintance  I  had  with  him,  I 
formed  a  favourable  opinion  of  his  piety.  But  so 
far  as  he,  or  any  one  else,  pleads  for  sin  in  the  hearts 
of  believers  all  their  days,  and  so  long  as  they  main- 
tain that  God,  the  author  of  all  good,  is  the  efficient 
cause  of  sin, — in  these  respects,  I  sincerely  think 
they  aid  the  cause  of  Satan.  If  God  be  the  efficient 
cause  of  sin,  and  if  it  be  brought  to  pass  by  him, 
certainly  Satan,  and  all  sinners  are  completely  ex- 
culpated from  all  blame :  and  what  more  could  Sa- 
tan wish  or  desire,  than  to  transfer  his  own  guiltc 
and  the  guilt  of  all  his  children,  from  himself  and 
from  them,  to  God. 


264  LETTER  VI, 

It  ought  furthermore  to  be  recollected  that  Mr. 
W.  has  been  unreasonably  censorious  in  his  ser- 
mons. And  the  reader  is  not  at  a  loss  to  know  who 
he  means  by  ministers  of  Satan.  This  considera- 
tion ought  to  palliate  for  my  offence,  if  indeed  I 
have  committed  one.  I  could  not  express  myself 
otherwise  without  disguising  my  real  sentiments, 
which  would  be  an  unpardonable  offence.  When 
the  peculiarities  ,of  his  system  are  lost  sight  of, 
he  then  speaks  like  a  christian  minister.  It  is  his 
system  therefore,  which  he  is  not  the  author  of,  that 
has  beguiled  him  into  his  inconsistencies,  and  not 
the  badness  of  his  heart.  And  I  sincerely  pray 
that  he  may  be  convinced  of  its  errors,  and  that  he 
will  yet  embrace  the  pure  doctrines  of  Christ,  un- 
shakled  by  the  fetters  of  Hopkinsianism.] 

5.  What  you  have  said  respecting  fale  conver- 
sions, I  consider  not  applicable  to  us  as  a  body  ; 
for  we  no  more  place  the  evidence  of  conversions 
in  dreams,  smells,  visionary  appearances,  and  appli- 
cations of  particular  texts  of  scripture,  &c.  than  we 
consider  it  essential  to  salvation,  to  believe  in  un- 
conditional election  and  reprobation — although  it 
is  possible  for  God  to  work  on  men's  hearts  by  any, 
or  all  these  ways. 

6.  We  agree  with  you,  that  a  truly  convert- 
ed man  has  the  image  of  God  stamped  upon  his 
heart.  But  pray,  how  am  I  to  know  whether  I 
have  this  holy  image  or  not?  It  certainly  is  no  visi- 
ble, tangible  thing.  It  must,  therefore,  in  the  na- 
ture of  things,  be  a  spiritual  work,  and  of  course 


WITNESS  OF   THE  SPIRIT.  265 

spiritually  discerned.  And  it  were  to  be  wished, 
that,  among  all  the  negative  marks  you  have  men- 
tioned, you  had  given  some  positive  signs  of  a  gen- 
uine conversion.  It  is  true,  you  say  it  may  be 
known  to  God,  and  to  the  person  himself:  but  you 
give  no  mark  by  which  it  may  be  known,  other- 
wise than  by  saying,  '•  Regeneration  is  a  real 
change  of  heart  from  sin  to  holiness,"  But  holi- 
ness is  a  very  vague  term,  and  needs  much  expla- 
nation to  understand  it.*  After  all  you  have  said 
to  convince  your  readers  that  Satan  can  transform 
himself  into  a  good  angel,  you  acknowledge  in  p. 
223,  that  "  Although  Satan  is  transformed  into  an 
angel  of  light,  he  never  impresses  the  divine  image 
on  any  of  his  converts."     This  is  undoubtedly  true. 

'"  Ayio:,  (agios)  the  word  rendered  holy,  signifies  to  separate 
from  the  earth,  or  not  of  the  earth.  Hence  any  thing-  which  is 
consecrated,  from  earthly  purposes,  to  the  particular  service 
of  God,  is  denominated  holy.  Hence  also,  ministers,  churches 
and  their  furniture,  are  called  holy.  On  this  account  the 
Jewish  priests  and  their  vestments,  under  the  law,  the  land 
of  Palestine,  the  temple  and  all  its  utensils,  as  they  were  es"- 
pecially  devoted  to  God,  and  his  chosen  people,  they  were 
called  holy.  But  as  the  word  is  applied  to  Christians,  it  im- 
ports that  all  the  powers  of  soul  and  body  are  solemnly  dedica 
ted  to  God.  The  internal  principle  of  holiness  which  is  im- 
planted in  the  heart  by  the  holy  Spirit  applying  the  merits  of 
Christ,  by  which  a  thorough  renovation  is  effected,  is  produc- 
tive of  external  holitiess — A  holy  walking  with  God,  and  an  he- 
ly,  upright  deportment  in  every  relation  of  life.  When  the 
soul  enjoys  this  principle  of  holiness,  and  exhibits  its  corres- 
pondent tempers  and  conduct,  there  is  the  abiding-  witness  of 
the  Spirit,  which  is  connected  witli  a  knowledge  of  our  accept- 
ance in  the  sight  of  God. 

Z 


2G6  LETTER  VI. 

But  in  page  190,  you  insist  on  the  possibility  of 
his  changing  himself  into  an  angel  of  love,  and  say, 
that  he  can  counterfeit /or r,  as  well  as  other  graces. 
If  so,  may  he  not  counterfeit  holiness  ?  Does  not  St. 
John  say,  God  is  love  ;  and  they  that  dwell  in  love 
dwell  in  God,  and  God  in  them?  Is  not  love,  there- 
fore, one  of  the  brightest  traits  of  the  divine  image  ? 
And  if  Satan  can  counterfeit  love,  I  see  no  reason 
why  he  may  not  counterfeit  holiness  also  ;  and  thus 
make  people  believe  they  have  the  u  divine  image 
impressed  upon  them,"  when,  indeed,  they  have  it 
not.  From  your  account  of  conversion,  and  its  evi- 
dence, I  can  discover  no  just  criterion  by  which  a 
person  may  distinguish  between  true  and  false  con- 
versions. How  then  can  a  person  determine  whe- 
ther he  be  deceived  or  not  ? 

7.  Taking  it  for  granted  that  there  is  great 
danger  of  being  deceived  in  regard  to  the  new  birth, 
there  is,  I  believe,  nevertheless,  infallible  marks, 
by  which  a  man  may  know  whether  he  be  justified 
or  not.  The  Lord  Jesus  saith,  Ye  must  be  bom 
again*  This,  it  is  admitted,  implies  a  radical 
change — and  to  suppose  a  man  can  experience  this 
great  renovation,  and  yet  be  totally  ignorant  of  it9 
is  as  unreasonable  as  to  suppose  a  man  could  be 
taken  from  a  dungeon,  and  brought  under  the  meri- 
dian sun,  without  a  knowledge  of  it.  St.  Paul  saith, 
Rom.  viii.  15,  16.  "  For  ye  have  not  received  the 
spirit  of  bondage  again  to  fear  ;  but  ye  have  receiv- 
ed the  Spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we  cry,  Abba, 
Father.     The  Spirit  itself  beareth  witness  with  our 


WITNESS  OF  THE  SPIRIT.  267 

spirits,  that  we  are  the  children  of  God.1'  St.  John 
alsosaith,  1  John  v.  10,  "He  that  believeth  on  the 
Son  of  God  hath  the  witness  in  himself."  Again, 
1  Cor.  ii.  12.  "Now  we  have  received,  not  the 
spirit  of  the  world,  but  the  Spirit  which  is  of  God  ; 
that  we  might  know  the  things  which  arc  freely  giv- 
en to  us  of  God."  Here  then  is  the  direct  witness 
of  the  Spirit,  bearing  witness  zcith  our  spirits,  that  we 
are  the  children  of  God ;  and  it  is  said  to  be  given 
for  this  purpose,  that  we  might  know  the  things  which 
are  freely  given  us  of  God.  Gal.  v.  25 — 25,  "  But  the 
fruit  of  the  Spirit  is  love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering, 
gentleness,  faith,  meekness,  temperance ;  against 
such  there  is  no  law.  And  they  that  are  Christ's  have 
crucified  the  flesh,  with  the  affections  and  lusts.  If 
we  live  in  the  Spirit,  let  us  also  walk  in  the  Spirit.'3 
In  these  words  we  have  the  indirect  witness  of  the 
Spirit,  denominated  its  fruits;  which  cannot  exist 
where  the  direct  evidence  is  wanting,  no  more  than, 
there  can  be  fruit  on  a  tree  destitute  of  life — for  the 
Spirit  is  a  Spirit  of  life.  Rom.  viii.  2.  "  But  now 
being  made  free  from  sin,  and  become  servants  to 
God,  ye  have  your  fruit  unto  holiness,  and  the  end 
everlasting  life."  According  to  this  declaration  of 
the  Apostle,  those  who  have  their  fruit  unto  holiness, 
are  first  made  free  from  sin.  John  xv.  14.  Ye  are 
my  friends,  if  ye  keep  my  commandments*  From 
the.se  passages  of  sacred  scripture,  we  perceive 
that  the  christian  has  a  three-fold  testimony,  all 
agreeing  to  witness  to  the  same  fact,  viz.  that  he  is 
an  heir  of  God,  a  servant  and  friend  of  Jesus  Christy 


268  LETTER  VI. 

1 .  The  direct  witness  of  the  Spirit,  which  bears 
witness  with  his  spirit  that  he  is  born  of  God.-— 

2.  Its  indirect  witness  which  are  its  fruits.  3.  His 
external  deportment,  called  keeping  the  command- 
ments, which  perfectly  corresponds  to  the  internal 
dispositions  of  the  heart.  Where  these  evidences 
are  found,  the  person  cannot  be  deceived.  And 
where  are  we  to  seek  for  them,  but  in  our  own  hearts 
and  lives  ?  You  suppose,  u  peace,  joy  and  hope," 
are  no  evidences  of  conversion,  p.  205.  It  is  grant- 
ed, that  a  man  may  be  joyful,  may  have  a  false 
peace,  and  a  fallacious  hope,  while  unregenerated  ; 

a  regenerated  man  has  righteousness,  peace  and 
toy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  "  Being  justified  by  faith, 
we  have  peace  with  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus- 
Qbrisft}" — and  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  is  love,  joy, 
peace,  &c.  So  that,  although  a  man  may  be  de- 
ceived  by  an  imaginary  peace,  &c.  it  is  neverthe- 
less certain,  that  true  peace,  holy  joy,  and  divine 
love,  are  infallible  evidences  of  our  union  with  God. 
ihrough  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus. 

8.  If,  after  a  sinner  has  been  awakened  to  see  the 
depravity  of  his  heart,  and  the  sinfulness  of  his  life, 
having  had  a  discovery  of  the  holiness  and  spirit- 
uality of  the  divine  law,  which  excited  in  him  a 
godly  sorrow  for  sin  ;  and  also  has  been  led  to  a 
discovery  of  the  infinite  merits  of  the  Lord  Jesus, 
who  bore  the  curse  for  him — If,  I  say,  he  has  been 
brought  to  this  view  of  things,  and  then  experien- 
ced a  removal  of  his  guilt  upon  his  believing  in 
Jesus  Christ  as  his  Saviour,  and  if  divine  joy,  love. 


DISINTERESTED  BENEVOLENCE.    269 

and  peace  succeed  his  grief  and  sorrow,  so  that  he 
feels  love  to  God  and  is  reconciled  to  his  command- 
ments,— be  has  a  right  to  conclude  himself  justified, 
even  though  he  should  afterwards  become  an  apos- 
tate. For  president  Edwards  and  Dr.  Bellamy^ 
to  whom  you  refer,  drew  many  of  their  conclusions 
respecting  apostacy,  from  the  mistaken  notion,  that 
a  person  once  justified,  can  never  finally  fall.  Hence 
they  inferred  that  all  apostates  turned  away  from 
the  "  appearance  of  piety"  only — That  all  such 
were  either  deceived,  or  were  wilful  hypocrites. — 
Let  a  man  therefore  examine  himself,  not  by  an 
imaginary  something,  called  conversion,  but  by  the 
infallible  marks  before  mentioned,  and  if  he  have 
them  let  him  hold  fast  whereunto  he  hath  attained, 
and  ardently  press  forward  to  the  fulness  of  redeem- 
ing love. 

9.  Permit  me  also  to  make  a  few  observations 
upon  your  sermon  on  the  distinction  between  the  re- 
generate, and  the  unregencrate.  According  to  your 
representation,  the  "dividing  line"  between  them  is, 
the  one  has  a  supreme  regard  to  self,  and  the  other 
a  supreme  regard  to  God.  This  may  be  accurate 
enough :  but  the  way  in  which  you  express  your- 
self about  ;;  disinterested  benevolence,"'  has  a 
tendency  to  perplex  the  mind.  "  Disinterested  be- 
nevolence" is  a  phrase  often  used  by  the  Hopkin- 
sian  writers,  and  it  sounds  very  pleading  to  the  ear, 
but  it  is  something  to  which  man  is  a  total  stranger* 
It  is  manifest  from  the  concurrent  testimony  of  holy 
scripture,  that  all  the  designs  of  God  towards  fallen 
z  2 


270  LETTER  VI. 

man,  are  not  only  for  the  exhibition  of  his  own  infin- 
ite glory,  but  also  for  the  happiness  of  his  intel- 
ligent creatures.  "  God  so  loved  the  world,  that 
he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  be- 
lieveth  on  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlast- 
ing life."  Here  the  end  for  which  God  gave  his  Son 
a  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  world,  is  said  to  be, 
that  mankind  might  be  saved.  Accordingly,  when 
a  man  seeks  his  own  salvation,  if  he  seek  agreea- 
ble to  the  method  proposed  in  the  gospel,  he  seeks 
the  glory  of  God  ;  and  when  he  seeks  the  glory  of 
God,  he  also  seeks  his  own  happiness  ;  for  the  glo- 
ry of  God,  and  the  happiness  of  men  are  two  points, 
which  ultimately  concentrate,  and  in  practice  can 
never  be  separated.*     To  talk,  therefore,  about  ab- 

*  This  doctrine  of  disinterested  benevolence,  has  led  some 
ilopkinsian  writers  to  affirm,  that  in  order  to  be  saved,  a  sin- 
ner must  be  willing  to  be  damned.  "  God  has  revealed  it  to 
be  his  will  to  punish  some  of  mankind  forever.  You  know- 
not  but  you  are  one  of  them.  Whether  you  shall  be  saved  or 
damned  depends  entirely  upon  his  will  ;  and  supposing  he 
sees  it  most  for  his  glory,  and  the  general  good,  that  you 
should  be  damned,  it  is  certainly  his  will  that  you  should  be 
damned.  On  this  supposition,  then,  you  ought  to  be  willing 
to  be  damned  ;  for  not  to  be  willing  to  be  damned,  in  this 
case,  is  opposing  God's  will,  instead  of  saying,  thy  -mil  be 
done." 

"  Without  which  submission  it  is  impossible  a  man  should 
be  saved."  "  So  there  is  no  other  way  for  us,  not  to  turn-  ene- 
mies to  God  ourselves,  but  to  be  willing  that  some  of  our 
fellow  men  should  be  enemies  to  him  for  ever."  "  But  as  soon 
as  we  cease  to  be  thus  willing  to  be  given  up  to  sin,  we  are 
myeii  up,   and  turned  enemies  to  God  and  all  good."    Con> 

rast  between  Calvinism  and  Hopkins  ianism,  p.  191. 


DISINTERESTED  BENEVOLENCE.    271 

stracting  ourselves,  so  as  to  have  no  regard  to  our 
own  happiness,  Is  an  idle  theory,  having  no  founda- 
tion in  scripture,  and  is  utterly  repugnant  to  com- 
mon sense.  That  we  are  to  deny  ourselves  of  all 
ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts,  and  take  up  our  daily 
cross,  is  a  scriptural  and  rational  doctrine  :  but  that 
we  are  to  do  this  without  any  regard  to  our  present 
and  eternal  happiness,  is  no  where  recorded  in 
scripture,  nor  can  it  be  concluded  from  our  relation 
to  God,  as  our  Creator  and  Redeemer.     So  far  from 

How  inconsistent  these  sentiments  ?  If  any  be  saved,  God 
is  willing-  they  should  be  saved.  In  this  case  then,  to  be  v4U 
ling  to  be  damned,  is  to  be  willing-  to  be,  what  God  is  not  wil- 
ling- we  shoxdd  be  ;  that  is,  to  be  willing  to  oppose  God's  will ! 
For  to  say,  that  God  is  not  willing*  to  save  those  who  are 
saved,  is  to  say  that  he  saves  them  against  his  will,  which  is 
too  great  an  absurdity  for  any  one  to  believe. 

Is  it  not  very  extraordinary  that  any  one  should  deliberate- 
ly assert,  that  in  order  to  be  reconciled  to  God,  Ave  must  be 
willing  to  be  enemies  to  him  forever  !  To  be  saved,  we  must 
be  willing  to  be  at  eternal  enmity  to  God!  Such  shocking 
and  unscriptural  opinions  carry  sufficient  evidence  of  their 
own  absurdity.  They  are  here  cited  to  shew  to  what  lengths 
some  men  have  gone  in  their  wild,  fantastic  notions. 

A  theological  problem  for  the  metaphysical  divine  to  solve. 
Mr.  Williston  affirms,  That  the  dividing  line  between  the 
regenerate  and  the  unregenerate  is,  the  one  has  a  supreme  regard 
to  self,  and  the  other,  a  supreme  regard  for  God — that  sin  con- 
sists in  selfshness — that  consequently  the  distinguishing  mark 
of  a  christian  is  disinterested  benevolence — and  yet  that  the 
best  of  men  do  always  sin  in  deed,  word,  and  thought — Where 
then  is  disinterested  benevolence  ?  If  none  are  Christians,  but 
those  who  have  disinterested  benevolence  ;  and  if  all  ar-.'  8 
fiih  as  ahvays  to  sin,  where  is  his  Christian  ? 


2fS  LETTER  VI. 

it,  that  we  arc  commanded  to  love  our  neighbour 
only  as  we  love  ourselves.  The  will  of  God  is  the 
supreme  rule,  by  which  the  conduct  of  all  intelli- 
gent creatures,  should  be  regulated — But  God  wills 
the  present  and  future  happiness  of  his  rational 
creatures ;  and  therefore  we  should  will  and  seek 
the  same.  That  selfish  principle  which  prompts 
an  individual  to  seek  his  own  happiness  only,  with- 
out any  regard  to  the  happiness  of  his  fellow-crea- 
tures, to  be  sure,  is  repugnant  to  the  spirit  of  Chris- 
tianity. The  truly  philanthropic  soul,  actuated  by 
the  love  of  God  and  man,  will  rejoice  in  the  tempo- 
ral and  spiritual  prosperity  of  others,  as  well  as  in 
his  own — and  when  the  glory  of  God  frustrates  any 
of  his  preconceived  opinions  or  schemes,  he  is  wil- 
ling to  relinquish  these  opinions  and  schemes,  not 
only  because  they  are  inconsistent  with  the  glory  of 
God,  but  also,  because  they  are  incompatable  with 
his  own  happiness. 

The  Apostle  Paul  saith,  For  no  man  ever  yet  ha- 
ted his  own  flesh.  Gal.  ii.  17.  But  the  Hopkinsian 
idea  of  disinterestedbenevolence,  which  declares  that 
a  man  must  be  willing  to  be  damned,  in  order  to  be 
saved,  teaches  us  to  hate  our  own  flesh.  That  it 
is  utterly  impossible  for  man  to  be  actuated  by  such 
a  principle  is  fully  evident.  No  man  can  be  actua- 
ted by  a  principle  that  he  does  not  possess.  And 
to  be  disinterested,  is  to  have  no  interest  in  our  wel- 
fare. But  to  have  no  interest  in  a  thing,  is  to  be 
wholly  indifferent  about  it,  that  is,  to  have  no  con- 
cern about  it.     And  can  a  man  act  from  a  principle 


DISINTERESTED  BENEVOLENCE.    273 

in  which  he  takes  no  interest,  concerning  which  he 
is  entirely  indifferent,  and  which  he  feels  not  to  ope- 
rate in  his  heart  ?  Is  not  this  nearly  the  same  as  to 
say  a  man  is  greatly  interested  in  that  in  which 
he  feels  entirely  disinterested?  How  far  is  this 
removed  from  a  contradiction  '? 

To  propose  the  general  good  of  the  human  fami  ly- 
sis a  motive  to  the  human  mind,  is  to  teach  an  un- 
suitable lesson  to  &  finite  mind.  Who  but  the  infin- 
ite God  can  have  such  comprehensive  views  of  all 
things,  as  to  know,  in  every  case,  what  is  best  for 
the  general  and  universal  good  ?  Certainly  no  finite 
mind  is  adequate  to  take  such  a  comprehensive  sur- 
vey of  universal  existence,  as  to  know  what  line  of 
conduct  will  best  conduce  to  the  goo d  of  all.  So 
circumscribed  is  our  knowledge,  that  we  are  fre- 
quently at  a  loss  how  to  act  for  the  best,  as  it  res- 
pects those  things  which  immediately  concern  our- 
selves, and  our  own  acquaintance.  Much  less  can 
we  ascend  to  that  summit  of  wisdom,  as  to  know 
what  will  be  best  for  the  "  great  whole"  of  intelli- 
gent existence.  The  motive  therefore  being  be- 
yond the  reach  of  man,  he  cannot  be  influenced  by 
it.  He  is  dazzled,  overpowered,  and  lost  in  the 
variety,  the  complexity,  and  the  immensity  of  the 
object.  To  seek  the  good  of  "  being  in  general," 
I  must  have  a  knowledge  of  "  being  in  general." — 
But  to  such  knowledge  I  cannot  hope  to  attain  ;  and 
therefore  I  must  be  totally  discouraged  from  ever 
acting  from  an  acceptable  motive.  And  what  does 
the  untutored  savage,  or  the  child  ten  years  ok1, 


274  LETTER  VI. 

know  about  your  system  of  disinterested  benevo- 
lence ?  And  is  it  impossible  they  should  have  their 
hearts  right  with  God,  until  they  are  initiated  into 
all  the  subtleties  of  your  "  new  divinity  ?" 

If  every  individual  of  the  human  family  were  to 
geek  his  own  happiness,  and  the  happiness  of  his 
neighbour,  according  to  the  directions  of  scripture, 
by  repenting,  believing,  and  loving  God,  and  by  dis- 
persing abroad,  giving  to  the  poor,  clothing  the 
naked,  &c.  according  to  the  best  of  his  ability,  then 
the  universal  good  would  be  realized.  This  is  the 
way,  and  the  only  way  which  the  scriptures  point 
out  for  the  regulation  of  man's  conduct. 

Where  is  disinterested  benevolence  to  be  found  ? 
Not  in  God  surely.  lie  seeks  the  manifestation  of 
his  ozon  glory ,  in  all  his  works  and  ways.  And  his 
glory  is  exhibited  in  Creation.  Redemption]  Salvation, 
and  in  his  superintending  providence  over  the  works 
of  his  hands :  and  it  is  so  evident,  as  to  need  but 
little  proof,  that  in  creation,  redemption,  and  salva- 
tion, he  connects  his  own  glory  with  the  happiness 
of  his  intelligent  creatures.  All  those,  therefore? 
who  make  the  will  of  God  the  rule  of  their  conduct, 
seeking  their  own  happiness  according  to  its  direc- 
tions, seek,  also  the  glory  of  God,  and  the  happiness 
of  the  universe.  Bat  here  is  no  such  disinterested 
love,  as  makes  a  man  willing  to  go  to  hell,  and  be 
at  eternal  enmity  against  God,  for  the  good  of 
M  being  in  general  V  Such  strange  inconsistencies 
are  not  recognized  by  Christianity, 


DISINTERESTED  BENEVOLENCE.    275 

10.  That  a  Christian  may  have  an  eye  to  his 
eternal  reward  in  all  he  does,  is  also  abundantly 
demonstrated  from  scripture.  Labour  not,  said  Je- 
sus Christ,  for  the  meat  which perisheth,  but  for  the 
meat  which  shall  endure  unto  everlasting  life,  which 
the  Son  of  mail  shall  giveyoiu  Moses  refused  to  be 
called  the  son  of  Pharaoh's  daughter — because  he 
had  respect  to  the  recompense  of  reward.  And  that 
bright  cloud  of  witnesses,  exhibited  in  the  eleventh 
chapter  to  the  Hebrews,  all  declared  by  their  obe- 
dient faith,  that  they  sought  a  city  which  hath  foun- 
dations, whose  builder  and  maker  is  God.  Whatso- 
ever was  right,  was  promised  to  those  who  stood 
idle,  to  induce  them  to  enter  into  the  vineyard  and 
labour.  The  danger  of  apostacy  is  also  mentioned 
by  the  inspired  writers,  to  guard  christians  against 
sin, — "  Let  us  fear,  lest  a  promise  being  left  us  of 
entering  into  his  rest,  any  of  you  should  seem  to 
come  short  of  it."  "  Let  us  labour,  therefore,  to 
enter  into  that  rest,  lest  any  man  fall,  after  the  same 
example  of  unbelief."  What  example  of  unbelief 
was  this,  but  that  of  the  Israelites,  who  fell  in  the 
wilderness,  because  they  disbelieved  God,  and  his 
servant  Moses  ?  "  They  did  all  drink,"  says  Paulf 
;;  the  same  spiritual  drink,  (for  they  drank  of  that 
spiritual  rock  which  followed  them  ;  and  that  rock 
was  Christ.)  But  with  many  of  them  God  was  not 
well-pleased  ;  for  they  were  overthrown  in  the  wil- 
derness.      NOW    THESE     THINGS    WERE    OUR    ENSAM- 

ples,  to  the  intent  that  we  should  not  lust  after  evil 
things,  as  they  also  lusted."     These  awful  exam- 


27b  LETTER  VI. 

pies  of  apostacy,  and  the  fearful  punishment  which 
followed,  are  recorded  upon  the  page  of  inspiration, 
to  guard  believers  in  all  ages,  against  similar  acts 
of  rebellion.  We  may  speculate  as  much  as  we 
please,  but  it  is  difficult  to  reason  against  facts. — 
They  remain,  and  will  forever  remain  an  immovable 
barrier  against  the  hypothetical  speculations  of  the 
mere  theorist.  Believing,  loving,  and  obeying  are 
the  invariable  conditions  of  the  covenant  of  grace  ; 
and  it  is  on  the  performance  of  these,  that  our  pre- 
sent and  eternal  salvation  is  suspended.  In  this  the 
divine  goodness  is  most  eminently  illustrated,  in 
condescending  to  bestow  eternal  life  on 'conditions 
so  light  and  easy  to  be  performed.  There  is  in- 
deed, no  proportion,  comparatively  speaking,  be- 
tween the  conditions  required,  and  the  blessings 
promised  ;  and  therefore  our  present  and  future  sal- 
vation is,  in  the  most  emphatical  sense  of  the  word, 
of  grace.  It  was  an  act  of  amazing  condescension 
of  God,  so  to  fix  and  reveal  the  terms  of  salvation, 
that  feeble,  ignorant  man,  could  understand  and 
comply  with  them.  And  the  divine  goodness  is  no 
less  conspicuous  in  promising  the  reward  of  eternal 
life,  to  incite  the  Christian  to  diligence  in  running 
the  race  set  before  him.  In  these  respects  we  be- 
hold the  revelation  of  God,  and  the  dispensation  of 
grace,  suited  to  the  capacity  and  circumstances  of 
man.  "  0  the  depth  of  the  riches,  both  of  the  wis- 
dom and  knowledge  of  God  !  how  unsearchable  are 
his  judgments,  and  his  ways  past  finding  out/' 


CONCLUSION 


i,  XjET  us  now  for  a  moment,  review  the  doc- 
trines which  have  been  the  subject  of  investigation. 
Consider  the  proposition  which  ascribes  all  events 
to  God,  as  their  efficient  cause.  To  establish  this 
fundamental  point  of  your  system,  you  are  under 
the  necessity  of  excluding  every  other  agent  from 
the  universe,  only  as  they  are  used  as  necessary  in- 
struments to  execute  the  pre-ordained  purposes  of 
the  divine  mind.  Aware  that  mankind  are  respon- 
sible for  their  conduct,  you  are  forced  to  admit,  in 
words,  their  free-agency,  although  by  such  admis- 
sion you  fly  directly  in  the  face  of  your  former  pro- 
position ;  for  the  two  propositions  are  utterly  irre- 
concilable and  contradictory.  If  the  first  be  true, 
the  other  is  undeniably  false  ;  if  the  latter  be  true, 
the  former  falls  before  it,  It  may,  however,  be  said, 
"  We  believe  them  both,  although  they  are  contra- 
dictory." This  is  impossible.  That  we  may  be- 
lieve things  mysterious  and  incomprehensible,  is 
granted — but  there  is  a  vast  difference  between 
subjects  which  arc  mysterious  and  incomprehensi- 
ble, and  those  which  are  self-contradictory,  and 
therefore  subversive  of  each  other.  The  former, 
when  supported  by  evidence,  command  our  faith 
a  a 


273  LETTER  VI. 

and  veneration ;  the  latter  shock  our  reason,  and 
excite  unbelief  and  disgust.  Moreover,  if  proposi- 
tions contradictory  one  to  the  other,  claim  our  as- 
sent, there  is  an  embargo  laid  upon  all  rational  in- 
vestigation ;  and  we  no  longer  have  any  clue  to 
guide  the  mind  in  her  inquiries  after  truth.  Nay, 
it  destroys  all  distinction  between  truth  and  error, 
and  presents  an  impassable  barrier  against  the  pro- 
gress of  the  human  mind  in  the  pursuit  of  evidence. 
If  I  may  believe  both  sides  of  a  contradiction  true, 
in  one  instance,  I  also  may  in  every  other  instance  ; 
and  hence  I  may  believe  a  thing  true  and  false  at 
the  same  time — I  may  believe  it  cold  and  hot,  wet 
and  dry,  at  the  same  time,  in  the  same  place — In 
fine,  I  may  believe  or  not  believe,  as  whim  and  fan- 
cy dictate,  without  any  regard  to  truth  and  error. — 
This  is  one  unhappy  tendency  of  your  doctrine. 

2.  Another  no  less  fatal  is,  that  it  destroys  all 
distinction  between  virtue  and  vice.  If  all  actions 
are  decreed,  and  all  tend  to  the  same  ultimate  end, 
as  you  assert  they  do,  then  all  are  equally  good 
in  their  place  and  in  their  order.  How  can  that  be 
criminal  in  the  sight  of  God,  which  is  perfectly  ac- 
cording to  his  pleasure,  and  viewed  in  the  aggre- 
gate, "  infinitely  pleasing  to  him  V  According  to 
your  system,  all  things,  good  and  bad,  by  a  regular 
concatenation  of  causes  and  events,  are  tending  to 
the  same  end,  which  is  the  greatest  possible  per- 
fection of  the  "  great  whole," — And  if  so,  then  the 
apostacy  of  Angels  and  man,  the  adultery  of  David, 
the  idolatry  of  Solomon,  the  treachery  of  Judas, 


CONCLUSION.  279 

with  all  other  sins,  were  as  necessary  for  the  con- 
summate perfection  "  of  the  universe,"  as  was  the 
holiness  of  Enoch,  the  faith  of  Abraham,  the  purity, 
sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  all  the 
christian  virtues  of  all  other  prophets  and  apostles, 
saints  and  martyrs.  What  a  flood-gate  does  this 
awful  doctrine  hoist  for  the  overflowing  of  ungodli- 
ness !  and  what  a  motive  does  it  exhibit  for  the  vi- 
cious to  go  on  greedily  in  sin.  Must  it  not  be  the 
duty  of  every  man  who  sees  between  truth  and 
error,  to  lift  up  his  voice  against  a  system,  fraught 
with  such  mischief  to  mankind  ? 

3.  Another  ill  tendency  of  your  doctrine  is,  that 
it  makes  void  the  law  of  God.  You  intimate  that 
the  decrees  and  commands  are  opposed  one  to  the 
other.  Our  Saviour  saith,  A  house  divided  against 
itself  cannot  stand.  And  if  the  decrees  and  com- 
mands are  in  opposition  one  to  the  other,  one  or  the 
other  must  fall — consequently,  if  your  doctrine  of 
irresistible  decrees  stands,  the  commands  must  fall. 
And  here  also,  it  is  proper  to  observe,  that  all  re- 
straints are  taken  off  from  the  vicious.  If  you  urge 
the  prohibitory  commands  of  God  to  a  vicious  man, 
initiated  into  your  doctrine,  he  may  justly  reply, 
u  The  commands  are  of  no  consequence  to  me — all 
events  are  decreed ;  and  my  conduct  is  an  event, 
which,  although  contrary  to  the  law  of  God,  is, 
nevertheless,  decreed,  and  therefore  according  to 
his  pleasure.  Why  should  I  trouble  myself  about 
my  conduct,  since  all  my  thoughts  and  actions  are 
as  much  beyond  my  control,  as  the  movement  of 


280  BETTER  VI. 

the  planetary  system."  It  would  be  in  vain  for 
you  to  tell  him  such  conduct  is  forbidden  ;  for  if 
there  be  a  secret  decree  opposing  the  command, 
you  know  not  but  his  wicked  conduct  is  as  agreea- 
ble to  the  pleasure  of  God,  as  your  reproof.  In- 
deed  both,  on  your  principle,  are  according  to  a 
hidden  counsel,  over  which  neither  of  you  have  any 
control. 

4.  It  not  only  destroys  the  binding  influence  of 
the  law,  but  it  also  renders  useless  the  whole  sys- 
tem of  revelation,  gospel  as  well  as  law.  If  the  de- 
crees are  contrary  to  the  law,  they  may  also  be,  for 
aught  you  know,  opposed  to  the  gospel  likewise. — 
If  we  are  not  to  be  guided  by  revelation  to  know 
the  mind  of  God  in  one  case,  can  you  assign  any 
satisfactory  reason  why  we  should  be  in  the  other  ? 
if  God  command  one  thing,  and  decree  in  direct 
opposition  to  it,  why  may  he  not  also  promise  one 
thing  and  yet  decree  never  to  accomplish  it  ?  This 
dreadful  consequence  of  your  system  carries  us 
back  to  the  ages  beyond  the  flood ;  nay,  we  are 
landed  in  the  dark  shades  of  infidelity,  where  we 
must  group'in  the  impenetrable  gloom  of  uncertain- 
ly and  doubt.  I  would  not  willingly  fix  an  unfair 
consequence  upon  the  doctrine  of  an  antagonist. — 
But  this  shocking  inference,  it  appears  to  me, 
flows  as  naturally  from  the  principle  I  oppose,  as 
the  stream  does  from  its  fountain.  Indeed  if  man 
be  compelled  by  a  secret,  almighty  power  in  all  he 
does,  he  is  no  more  actuated  by  external  motives, 


CONCLUSION.  281 

by  commands  or  promises,  nor  by  any  part  of  rev- 
elation, than  the  ship  driven  by  the  fierce  wind. 

5.  Let  us  call  to  mind  also  your  doctrine  of  un- 
conditional election  to  eternal  life,  and  reprobation 
to  eternal  death.  To  see  the  inconsistency  of  thi- 
part  of  your  system,  it  is  necessary  to  view  it  in 
connexion  with  your  ideas  of  atonement.  You 
acknowledge  Chri  ;  1  for  all  the  human  race. — 
I  have  before  ed  that  your  system,    in   this 

respect,  is  far  worse  than  ofd  Calvinism,  which,  to  be 
sure,  is  bad  enough.  The  latter  lin  its  the  atone- 
ment to  the  elect  only  ■  and  in  this  instance,  it  is 
consistent  with  itself,  although  repugnant  to  the  ex- 
press declarations  of  scripture .  But  Hopkinsian- 
ism,  with  an  inconsistency  peculiar  to  itself,  repre- 
sents God  as  fore-ordaining,  before  the  foundation 
of  the  world,  the  eternal  destruction  of  part  of  man- 
kind, without  any  regard  to  their  wicked  works 
foreseen  ;  and  yet  it  asserts,  that  Jesus  Christ  actu- 
ally atoned  for  those  identical  reprobates  for  whom 
God  the  Father  never  had  thoughts  of  mercy  !  It 
has  been  already  observed,  that  these  jarring  senti- 
ments set  God  the  Father  and  God  the  Son  at  va- 
riance, and  therefore  cannot  be  true.  The  doc- 
trine of  personal  and  irrespective  reprobation,  is 
totally  irreconcilable  with  the  universal  atonement 
of  Christ.  But  the  latter  sentiment  is  so  fully  as- 
serted in  scripture,  that  it  has  constrained  you  and 
other  Hopkinsian  divines,  to  yield  to  its  truth.  Yet 
the  horrid  decree  of  reprobation  cannot  be  given 
up.  You  are  then  driven  to  an  inconsistency,  ut- 
a  a  2 


282  LETTER  VI. 

terly  incredible,  that  Christ  died  to  save  those  who 
were  from  all  eternity  doomed  to  eternal  burnings  ! 
As  you  have  acknowledged,  in  the  full  blaze  of 
truth,  the  universality  of  the  atonement,  I  entertain 
a  faint  hope  that  you  will  yet  give  up  unconditional 
reprobation,  and  be  a  consistent  Methodist.  You 
start  at  this  idea,  I  suppose,  thinking  it  would  ruin 
your  credit.  And  so,  in  all  probability  it  would 
among  bigots.  The  candid,  however,  will  applaud 
your  frankness — and  I  have  no  doubt  but  the  Lord 
Jesus  would  smile  to  see  you  extricated  from  your 
discordant  system. 

6.  Another  inconsistency  originating  from  the 
one  last  mentioned  is,  that  you  invite  all  to  come 
to  Christ,  and  obtain  life,  telling  them  it  is  their 
own  fault  if  they  do  not  come.  The  fault,  it  is  in- 
timated, is  in  their  will,  called  a  "  moral  inability." 
What  an  absurdity,  thus  to  mock  those  creatures, 
who,  according  to  another  part  of  your  system,  are 
bound  by  an  irrevocable  decree  of  reprobation,  by 
telling  them  they  may  come  to  Christ  if  they  will ! 
Were  you  sufficiently  powerful  and  crafty,  to  bind 
one  half  of  your  parishioners  to  their  houses  with  a 
cord  that  could  be  neither  cut  nor  broken  ;  and  then 
send  a  messenger  to  tell  them  they  may  come  "  if 
they  will,"  and  hear  you  warn  the  elect  against  be- 
ing deceived  and  ruined,  by  the  "  ministers  of  Sa- 
tan," do  you  think  they  would  have  much  confi- 
dence in  your  sincerity  ?  It  would  not  make  you  al- 
together irreproachable  for  your  messenger  to  tell 
fhem,  u  the  meeting  house  is  sufficiently  large,  seats 


CONCLUSION.  283 

are  provided  for  you  all,  and  Mr.  W.  has  a  voice 
loud  enough  to  make  you  all  hear,  therefore  arise 
and  come.1'  They  would  still,  frequently  think 
of  their  cords,  and  of  the  man  who  bound  them. — 
And  what,  if  after  all,  you  should  instruct  your  mes- 
senger to  inform  them,  that  you  never  meant  they 
should  come  ?  but  that  you  bound  them  for  the  be- 
nevolent purpose  of  benefiting  those  whom  your 
great  clemency  had  dragged  to  church — that  they 
were  deprived  of  hearing  your  sermons,  for  the 
good  of  the  "  great  whole"  of  all  your  parishion- 
ers !  But  this  is  a  faint  comparison.  Your  repro- 
bates would  only  suffer  the  galling  of  the  cords  a 
short  time,  and  be  deprived  of  hearing  the  caution 
against  being  deceived  by  false  ministers,  although 
you  had  determined  to  deceive  them  yourself.  But 
those  whom  you  suppose  God  reprobated,  are,  ac- 
cording to  your  notion,  doomed  to  never-ending 
torments  for  fulfilling  the  secret  will  of  heaven, 
and  for  suffering  Satan,  or  his  ministers,  to  deceive 
them — although,  according  to  your  system,  God 
had  determined  to  deceive  them,  by  telling  them,  or 
by  instructing  ministers  to  tell  them,  that  they  may 
come  to  Christ  if  they  will,  when  at  the  same  time 
they  can  no  more  zvill  to  come.,  than  they  can  re- 
verse the  immutable  laws  of  heaven  and  earth ! — 
Why  then  tell  them  that  they  can  come  if  they  will  ? 
Is  not  this  tantalizing  them  with  false  appearances  ? 
7.  To  say  that  men  have  power,  naturally  to 
love  God,  while  they  have  a  4;  moral  inability,*'  is 
a  manifest  contradiction,    Inability  supposes  a  want 


m  LETTER  VI. 

oipozucr  :  and  therefore  to  say  that  a  man  has  power 
to  do  a  things  and  at  the  same  time  contend  that 
there  is  an  inability  to  do  that  thing,  is  saying  that 
a  man  has power,  and  yet  has  not  power*  Let  the 
inability  be  natural  or  moral,  it  is  certain  that,  so 
long  as  that  inability  remains,  the  sinner  has  not 
power  to  comply  with  the  requirements  of  the  di- 
vine law.  That  man  has  all  the  faculties  of  soul 
and  body,  generally  speaking,  to  understand  and  to 
do  the  will  of  God,  when  enlightened  and  assisted 
by  divine  grace,  is  granted.  But  that  he  can  know 
and  do  this,  abstract  from  the  grace  of  God,  is  evi- 
dently repugnant  to  scripture.  Without  me,  says 
Christ,  ye  can  do  nothing.  Not  by  might,  nor  by 
power,  but  by  my  Spirit,  saith  the  Lord.  Without 
the  illumination  of  God's  Spirit,  we  cannot  under- 
stand his  mind  respecting  us.  Hence  it  is  said, 
The  eyes  of  your  understanding  being  enlightened ; 
that  ye  may  know  what  is  the  hope  of  his  calling,  &c. 
It  is  therefore  unscriptural  and  unreasonable  to 
declare  to  sinners  that  they  have  power  naturally  to 
obey  God,  and  at  the  same  time  contend  that  they 
have  a  "  moral  inability"  to  obey  him.  And  is  it 
not  absurd  to  say  that  men  have  natural,  but  no 
moral  power,  to  do  moral  duties  !  "  The  natural 
man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit,  for  they 
are  foolishness  unto  him  :  neither  can  he  know  them, 
for  they  are  spiritually  discerned."  1  Cor.  ii.  14. 
When  the  natural  and  moral  man  are  contradistin- 
guished, the  one  signifies  an  unregenerate,  the  other 
a   regenerate  man.      Hence   to  say    a  man  has 


CONCLUSION.  W5 

natural  power  to  love  God,  is  to  say  that  he  caa 
love  God  while  unregenerated  ;  and  yet,  because  he 
is  unregeneratcd,  he  cannot  love  God ! 

8.  It  would  seem  that  this  doctrine  respecting 
man's  having  natural  power  to  love  God,  without  the 
aid  of  divine  grace,  has  been  adopted  to  vindicate 
the  justice  of  God,  in  the  condemnation  of  the  re- 
probates, from  whom  the  grace  of  repentance  and 
faith  is  withheld.  A  little  attention,  however,  to 
this  subject,  will  enable  us  to  see  the  fallacy  of  this 
reasoning.  The  "  moral  inability,"  which  always 
accompanies  this  "  natural  ability,"  is  a  conse- 
quence of  Adairfs  sin  ;  and  this  sin,  is  an  ciYcct  of 
an  eternal  aecree  of  God.  God  therefore,  from  all 
eternity,  decreed  that  the  reprobates  should  be 
held  under  the  iron  yoke  of  a  "  moral  inability,"  to 
do  good.  While  they  are  thus  acting,  they  are 
acting  under  the  influence  of  a  principle  for  which 
they  are  no  more  accountable,  than  the  quadruped 
is  for  not  walking  upon  two  feet,  instead  of  four. 
While  therefore  this  doctrine  holds  up  the  sem- 
blance of  justice  in  the  condemnation  of  the  repro- 
bate, when  that  semblance  is  removed,  the  most 
glaring  injustice  appears  in  full  view.  For,  as  long 
as  this  "  moral  inability"  remains,  the  sinner  can 
no  more  repent  and  believe,  than  he  can  break  the 
eternal  decree  of  God,  which,  the  advocates  of  this 
doctrine  contend  will  irresistibly  take  effect.  What 
Justice  can  there  be  in  punishing  a  man  for  not  do- 
ing an  impossibility.  Do  you  say  "  It  is  not  impos- 
sible, because  the  sinner  has  natural  power  to  da 


286  LETTER  VI. 

what  God  requires,  but  will  not."  But  do  yeu  not 
suppose  that  the  reason  why  he  will  not,  is  because 
of  his  indisposition,  or  moral  inability  ?  Put  a  man 
into  a  dungeon,  who  has  all  his  natural  functions 
complete,  and  exclude  all  light  from  him,  can  he 
see,  merely  because  he  has  the  faculty  of  sight  ? 
You  know  he  cannot.  And  neither  can  the  repro- 
bate believe  in  Christ  and  love  God,  without  divine 
grace,  even  though  it  should  be  granted  that  he  has 
natural  ability  so  to  do.  And  this  grace  you  sup- 
pose, is  never  bestowed  upon  the  reprobate.  How 
then  can  he  repent  and  love  God  ?  If  it  still  be  con- 
tended that  he  can  repent  and  love  God  without 
grace,  it  follows,  that  the  reprobate  may  become 
the  elect,  and  finally  enter  heaven  without  grace. 
What  an  astonishment  would  be  excited  among  the 
heavenly  host6,  to  see  a  graceless,  reprobated  mon- 
ster, shouting  the  praises  of  free,  electing  grace, 
(to  which  he  is  not  indebted)  before  the  throne  of 
God !  Do  you  say,  impossible  :  but  why  not  ?  If 
the  reprobate  has  all  the  natural  ability  to  love 
God  without  divine  grace,  and  therefore  can  do  it, 
where  is  the  impossibility  ?  I  suppose  it  will  be 
said,  because  it  is  morally  impossible.  Be  it  so. 
Then  we  have  a  case  possible,  and  impossible,  at  the 
same  time  !  The  reprobate  can  love  God  with  all 
his  heart,  and  yet  cannot  at  the  same  time  ! !  And 
is  the  justice  of  God  magnified  in  tormenting  in- 
telligent beings  in  hell  forever,  for  not  doing  that 
which  is  possible  and  impossible  at  the  same  time  ? 
Can  any  man  of  common  sense  persuade  himself 


CONCLUSION.  287 

that  such  manifest  contradictions  will  be  "believed 
by  rational  beings  ? 

If  the  reprobate  possesses  natural  power  to  love 
God,  and  therefore  can  love  him,  independent  of 
redeeming  grace,  then  the  decree  of  reprobation  is 
resistible,  and  will  not  take  effect,  and  of  course  the 
doctrine  of  definite  reprobation  is  false.  If  he  can- 
not love  God,  on  account  of  moral  inability,  then 
the  former  sentiment  respecting  natural  ability  is 
erroneous.  The  fact  is,  they  are  both  erroneous. — 
Christ  died  for  all  men.  All  may  and  can  repent 
and  love  God,  if  they  will,  and  be  saved  with  ever- 
lasting life,  through  the  merits  of  Christ  and  the 
agency  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 

"  But  if  all  the  temporal  and  spiritual  favours 
we  enjoy  arc  of  grace,  then  it  would  he  just  in  God 
to  withhold  them."  Granted  ;  but  He  can  no  more 
cease  to  be  good,  than  he  can  to  be  just :  and 
although  justice  does  not  require  an  exercise  of 
goodness,  yet  it  does  not  prevent  the  operation  of 
goodness.  As  long  therefore  as  God  remains  good, 
he  cannot  withhold  favours  from  those  who  have  not 
entirely  forfeited  them,   by  wickedly  abusing  them. 

It  may,  however,  be  said,  "  That  if  it  be  just  not 
to  bestow  blessings  upon  the  unregencrate,  it  is  just 
to  require  obedience  without  them,'1'1  And  suppose 
this  were  granted  also,  it  would  make  nothing  in  fa- 
vour of  the  sentiment  here  exploded  :  for  it  would 
certainly  be  an  impeachment  of  goodness  to  require 
us  to  eat  without  food,  or  to  labour  without  any  utc » 
sils,  or  to  repent  and  believe  in  Christ  without  grace. 


288  LETTER  VI. 

Goodness  being  an  essential  property  of  the  divine 
nature,  God  can  no  more  cease  to  exercise  it  to- 
wards proper  objects  of  it,  than  he  can  cease  to  be 
just.  Although  therefore,  he  is  under  no  obligation 
from  justice  to  bless  his  creatures  with  moral  ability 
to  do  moral  actions,  he  is  under  an  obligation  from 
goodness,  which  is  no  less  certain  in  its  exercise 
ih&n  justice.  Neither  does  the  exercise  of  goodness 
supplant  justice,  there  being  no  injustice  in  the  ex- 
ercise of  goodness.  To  be  just,  and  not  good,  is  to 
be  cruel — to  be  good,  and  not  just,  is  to  he  partial — 
to  he  just  and  good  both,  is  to  be  impartial  and  mer- 
ciful. 

9.  In  regard  to  your  insinuation  that  Methodist 
Preachers  are  ministers  of  Satan,  a  review  of  our 
doctrine  and  practice  from  our  first  rise  to  the  pre- 
sent time,  will  be  a  sufficient  refutation  of  all  such 
uncharitable  slanders.  We  have  done  nothing  in 
secret, — Our  doctrines  and  discipline  have  been 
published  to  the  world ;  and  our  characters  and 
conduct  have  been  exposed  to  the  eye,  not  only  of 
the  Christian  and  candid  part  of  the  community,  but 
also  to  the  vicious  and  malevolent.  It  is  true,  we 
have  had  the  misfortune  to  have  men  among  us 
sometimes,  whose  principles  and  characters  were 
found  to  be  bad  ;  but  when  discovered,  if  incorrigi- 
ble, they  were  legally  dismissed.  And  would  to 
God  we  were  the  only  people  who  have  to  lament 
this  evil.  Let  those  who  are  without  sin  in  this  res- 
pect, cast  the  first  stone. 


CONCLUSION. 

10.  Whether  our  doctrines  are  such  as  deserve  to 
be  ranked  among  the  doctrines  of  Satan  or  not,  the 
intelligent  reader  who  has  consulted  them,  must  de- 
termine. If  indeed,  we  taught  sinners  that  all  their 
crimes  were  an  effect  of  an  uncontrolable  decree, 
over  which  they  can  have  no  influence,  and  against 
which  it  is  needless  to  contend,  thereby  charging 
-l  all  the  sins  in  the  universe'1  on  the  God  of  im- 
maculate purity,  completely  exculpating  man  from 
all  blame,  there  might  be  some  reason  to  suspect 
that  our  doctrine  had  an  unholy  origin.  For  there 
can  be  little  doubt,  but  that  one  design  of  Satan  is, 
to  clear  himself  and  his  children,  and  to  impeach 
the  character  of  Deity.  And  what  more  effectual 
method  he  could  devise  to  do  this,  than  to  teach 
that  all  the  abominable  acts  in  the  universe  were 
fore-ordained  and  brought  to  pass  by  the  Almighty, 
it  is  difficult  to  conceive.  Our  doctrine,. however, 
is  directly  the  reverse  of  this.  We  teach  that  God 
governs  the  world  in  wisdom  and  goodness,  so  that 
sin  is  not  produced  by  him  ;  although  he  overrules 
sinners,  by  restraining,  checking,  and  in  many  in- 
stances turning  the  evil  propensities  of  their  hearts 
in  a  different  channel  from  what  they  intended. — 
We  believe  that  man,  who  was  created  holy,  and 
perfectly  qualified  to  till  the  distinguished  station  he 
occupied  in  the  creation,  conformably  to  the  will 
of  his  Creator,  was  free  to  act  according  to  thatm'// 
or  not — that  he  chose  the  latter,  and  thereby 
plunged  himself  into  sin,  which  drew  upon  him 
and  upon  his  posterity  the  curse  of  God.  To  res- 
b  b 


:00  LETTER  VI. 

cue  man  from  this  deplorable  condition,  Jesus 
Christ,  the  second  Adam,  undertook  our  cause,  as- 
sumed our  nature,  and  suffered  in  our  stead,  by 
which  he  made  a  complete  atonement  for  the  sins 
of  the  whole  world.  If  any  therefore  are  finally 
reprobated,  it  is  not  because  Jesus  Christ  did  not 
die  for  them,  nor  because  they  were  eternally  ex- 
cluded from  the  benefits  of  his  death  by  a  decree  of 
God;  but  because  they  voluntarily  reject  the  offers 
of  pardon  and  salvation.  Herein  the  justice  of  God 
is  rescued  from  the  charge  of  cruelty,  and  the  good- 
ness of  God  from  the  impeachment  of  partiality. — 
The  scriptural  doctrine  of  election  which  we  teach, 
flows  from  the  unbounded  goodness  of  God,  runs 
through  the  infinite  merits  of  Christ,  and  through 
the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  communicates  its  re- 
viving influence  to  the  hearts  of  all  who  fulfil  the 
condition  of  justification  here,  which  is  believing  in 
Christ  with  an  heart  unto  righteousness.  Such  is  the 
adorable  fitness  of  this  sublime  doctrine,  that,  when 
scripturally  viewed,  we  perceive  it  perfectly  harmo- 
nizes all  the  divine  attributes  of  wisdom,  justice, 
power,  and  goodness. 

11.  Or,  if  we  taught  mankind  they  must  live  in 
sin  all  the  days  of  their  lives  ;  and  that  pride,  im- 
penitence and  unbelief,  would  promote  humility, 
lowliness,  faith,  and  gratitude;  the  unbiassed  and 
thinking  part  of  the  christian  jvorld.  might  be  allow- 
ed to  suspect  that  our  understandings  were  a  little 
shaded  by  the  smoke  from  the  bottomless  pit ;  or 
that  our  reasoning  faculties  were  somewhat  impair- 


CONCLUSION.  291 

ed  by  too  close  an  alliance  with  the  prince  of  dark- 
ness. But  our  doctrine  is  opposed  to  this.  It  has 
been  our  principal  aim  to  preach  against  sin  of  ev- 
ery kind,  not  even  excepting  self-righteousness,  of 
which  you  seem  afraid  we  are  too  fond.  Indeed  it 
was  for  his  opposition  to  this  satanic  principle  that 
the  Rev.  J.  Wesley  was  so  violently  opposed  in  the 
commencement  of  his  widely  extended  ministerial 
labours.  We  continually  press  upon  sinners  the 
necessity  of  salvation  by  grace  through  faith — that 
the  love  of  God  must  be  shed  abroad  in  their  hearts 
by  trie  Holy  Ghost— and  that  justified  believers 
must  continually  grow  in  grace,  and  in  the  knowledge 
of  Jesus  Christ.  In  order  to  this  they  must  watch 
and  pray,  and  "  live  by  faith  in  the  Son  of  God, 
who  hath  loved  us,  and  given  himself  for  us,  an  of- 
fering well  pleasing  in  the  sight  of  God."  Is  this 
the  doctrine  of  Satan  ! 

12.  As  it  respects  the  ministerial  labours,  the 
Christian  experience  and  practice  of  the  Methodist 
ministry,  I  have  no  apprehension  that  it  would  suffer 
from  a  comparison  with  any  christian  church  on 
earth.  Look  at  the  christian  world  when  the  Lord 
first  raised  up,  and  sent  out  the  Methodist  ministers, 
and  compare  its  state  (Ken,  in  regard  to  doctrine., 
experience  and  practice,  with  its  present  condition. 
Since  that  period  the  peculiar  and  distinguished 
doctrines  of  the  gospel,  salvation  by  grace  through 
faith  in  Christ,  and  holiness  of  heart  and  life,  have 
taken  an  extensive  range,  not  only  through  Great- 
Britain,  and  the  United  States  of  America,  but  also 


292  LETTER  VI. 

ro  the  West-India  islands,  to  the  East-Indies,  to 
Africa,  and  many  other  parts  of  the  world.  It  is 
true,  other  denominations  have  contributed  largely 
towards  the  diffusion  of  Christian  knowledge,  by 
means  of  their  missionary  labours  ;  but  the  Metho- 
dists were  the  instruments  in  the  hands  of  God,  of 
giving  the  first  spring  to  this  great  and  glorious 
work.  This  has  been  so  manifest  to  the  atten- 
tive observer,  that  some  have  had  the  frank- 
ness to  acknowledge  it.  Let  the  reader,  for  in- 
formation on  this  subject,  consult  Hazves^  Ec- 
clesiastical History,  BucUs  Theological  Dictionary, 
under  the  article  Methodist,  and  Cokeys  Life  of  Wes- 
ley. And  what  but  the  same  philanthropic  spirit 
which  actuated  the  primitive  preachers  of  Chris- 
tianity, could  have  actuated  the  Methodist  minis- 
try ?  All  who  are  acquainted  with  our  temporal 
economy  well  know,  that  it  could  not  be  the  expect- 
ation of  pecuniary  reward  ;  and  those  who  are  ac- 
quainted with  the  labours  and  sufferings  of  our  min- 
istry, will  not  accuse  us  of  seeking  ease  and  self- 
indulgence.  Many  have  suffered  cold  and  naked- 
ness, some  stripes  and  imprisonments,  and  all  in 
their  turn  the  slanders  of  the  malignant,  the  false 
accusations  of  the  fiery  bigot,  and  the  sneers  of  that 
world  who  know  not  God.  But  in  the  midst  of 
this  contumely  and  reproach,  slander  and  misrepre- 
sentation, the  salutary  effects  of  our  ministrations 
have  extorted  from  others  an  unwilling  confession 
in  our  favour.  Did  we  refuse  to  preach,  until  the 
people  had  stipulated  to  give  us  three,  five3  ten,  or 


CONCLUSION.  293 

twenty  hundred  dollars  annually,  there  might  be 
some  cause  to  suspect  we  were  actuated  by  sinister 
motives,  and  that  our  ministry  was  founded  in  "  sel- 
fishness." Did  we  flatter  the  great,  frown  upon 
the  small,  and  practise  a  courtly  intrigue  towards  the 
world  to  obtain  its  smiles — Did  we  disguise  our 
real  sentiments  before  a  public  audience,  until  com- 
pelled to  "  come  out,"  and  own  them,  that  we 
might  avoid  an  open  and  fair  investigation  of  our 
principles,  we  might  be  supposed  to  have  some 
open  or  secret  collusion  with  the  grand  deceiver* 
But  no, — we  go  out  into  the  highways  and  hedges, 
spending  our  days  and  nights,  our  health  and 
strength,  and  some  expending  large  fortunes  to  car- 
ry the  glad  tidings  of  salvation  to  a  lost  world. — - 
And  by  the  grace  of  God  we  are  willing  to  spend 
and  be  spent  in  so  glorious  a  cause,  "  not  counting 
our  lives  dear  to  ourselves,  if  we  may  but  win 
Christ,  and  be  found  in  him,  not  having  our  own 
righteousness,  which  is  of  the  lav/,  but  the  righteous- 
ness which  is  by  faith  in  him."  And  through  the 
abundant  grace  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus,  there  are 
many  who  can  say,  that  we  have  been  uitfo  them  a 
sweet  savour  of  life,  who,  we  humbly  hope,  will  be 
our  crown  of  rejoicing  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus. 
13.  These  things  are  not  said  by  way  of  boast- 
ing, to  extol  the  creature.  We  know  that  "  God 
hath  put  this  treasure  into  earthen  vessels,  that  the 
excellency  of  the  power  may  be  of  God,  and  not  of 
men ;"  therefore  "  let  him  that  glorieth,  glory  in 
the  Lord."  If  it  hath  pleased  God  at  any  time  to 
Bb2 


234  LETTER  VI. 

give  success  to  our  ministry,  the  glory  and  honour 
is  due  to  him,  and  him  alone.  But  when  our  char- 
acters and  conduct  is  assailed,  and  the  purity  of  our 
motives,  (which  are  known  only  to  God  and  our- 
selves) are  called  in  question,  we  may  be  allowed 
to  speak  a  word  in  our  own  defence,  without  being 
accused  of  vanity  and  self-commendation.  While 
a  Methodist  minister  is  facing  the  storms,  enduring 
reproach  for  Christ's  sake,  and  riding  from  place  to 
place  to  preach  the  everlasting  gospel  to  a  perish- 
ing world,  it  is  an  easy  matter  for  a  parish  priest, 
snugly  situated  in  the  midst  of  surrounding  plenty, 
to  enter  his  pulpit  on  a  Sabbath  day,  and  entertain 
his  audience  with  a  cool,  systematic  discourse  on 
the  danger  of  the  eternally  elected  being  deceived 
by  these  ministers  of  Satan.  It  is  doubted  whether 
the  great  Head  of  the  Church  will  approbate  you, 
sir,  by  saying,  Well  done,  good  and  faithful  ser- 
vant, for  having  said  so  much  in  favour  of  sin,  and 
for  attempting  to  prove  that  the  holy  "  God  has  de- 
creed all  the  sins  in  the  universe." 

14.  How  much  more  consonant  to  scripture  and 
reason  to- unfold  the  wonderful  design  of  God  to 
-fallen  man,  in  the  rich  displays  of  his  grace  in  Christ 
fesus,  who  tasted  death  for  every  man.  To  warn 
sinners  of  their  approaching  danger,  if  they  con- 
tinue obstinate  in  their  sins — to  invite  them  to  re- 
turn unto  God  with  humble  and  penitent  hearts, 
that  they  may  be  received  to  his  favour — to  exhibit 
to  them  the  plenitude  of  divine  grace,  by  which  they 
may  be  delivered  from  all  their  sins,  become  holy  in 


CONCLUSION.  296 

heart  and  life,  and  thus  be  prepared  for  everlasting 
glory.  These  truths  are  calculated  to  expand  the 
mind  with  comprehensive  views  of  the  divine  good- 
ness and  wisdom  ;  and  to  excite  gratitude  and  con- 
fidence— gratitude  for  the  rich  provisions  of  redemp- 
tion, and  confidence  in  the  ample  promises  of  par- 
don and  sanctification. 

With  these  views  of  the  gospel  of  our  salvation, 
and  with  sentiments  of  love  for  you,  dear  sir,  and 
for  all  men,  I  take  my  leave  of  controversy  for  the 
present.  To  God  we  are  all  responsible  for  our 
sentiments  and  practice — He  is  love.  May  we 
therefore  provoke  one  another  to  love  and  good 
works.  If  indeed  controversy  should  stir  up  hatred 
and  ill-will,  instead  of  love  and  good-will,  we  should 
be  infinite  losers  by  our  labour.  It  is  possible, 
however,  to  speak  the  truth  in  love,  God  grant  that 
love  may  actuate  our  hearts  and  dwell  upon  our 

tongues. 

Yours,  affectionately, 

N.  BANGS, 
Rev.  S.  Williston,  Durham,  N,  Y. 
New-York  June  1,  1815., 


APPENDIX 


XT  is  said  in  the  preface  to  the  preceding  work, 
That  predestination  respect?  the  means  of  salvation, 
and  the  foundation  of  our  hope,  which  is  Christ  Je- 
sus. This  proposition  demands  proof.  By  the 
means  of  salvation,  is  understood,  not  merely  the 
outward  ordinances  of  the  Church,  which  are 
standing  memorials  of  Christ's  love  to  man,  and  in- 
contcstible  evidences  of  the  truth  of  Christianity  ; 
but  repentance,  faith  and  holiness,  without  which  it 
is  impossible  to  be  saved.  That  it  is  according  to 
the  unalterable  appointment,  or  the  immutable  pre- 
destination of  God,  that  none  shall  be  saved  without 
believing  in  Christ,  (I  mean  those  who  live  under 
the  light  of  the  gospel,  and  those  who  have  arrived 
to  an  adult  age)  and  without  holiness,  is  abundantly 
manifest  from  holy  scripture.  Except  ye  repent,  yt 
shall  all  likewise  perish.  He  that  believeth  not  shall 
be  damned.  Repent,  and  believe  the  gospel.  With- 
out faith,  it  is  impossible  to  please  him.  Without  ho- 
liness no  man  shall  see  the  Lord.  Be  ye  holy,  for  I 
am  holy.  This  is  the  will  of  God,  even  your  sane- 
tification.  These  texts  fully  express  the  unaltera- 
ble determination  of  God  respecting  the  means,  or 
condition  of  salvation,  and  the  necessary  qualifica- 
tion"? for  heaven  :  and  from  this  determination  no 


298  APPENDIX. 

one  need  expect  he  will  ever  recede.  Sinners  may 
vainly  attempt  to  fortify  themselves  against  the 
arrows  of  truth,  and  hope  to  escape  the  vengeance 
of  God.  If  they  refuse  to  repent,  and  believe  in 
Jesus  Christ,  they  can  have  no  scriptural  hope  of 
eternal  life.  God  has  revealed  the  terms  of  accept- 
ance ;  and  with  these  all  must  comply,  or  never 
enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

That  predestination  also  respects  the  foundation 
of  our  hope,  which  is  Christ  Jesus,  is  equally  mani- 
fest. This  is  the  stone  which  was  set  at  nought  by 
you  builders,  which  is  become  the  head  of  the  corner. 
Neither  is  there  salvation  in  any  other  :  for  there  is 
none  other  name  under  heaven  given  among  men, 
whereby  we  must  be  saved,  Acts  iv.  11,  12.  In  these 
words  the  Apostle  Peter  gave  the  cavelling  Jews 
to  understand,  that  if  they  rejected-  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth, as  the  Messiah,  they  could  have  no  hope  of 
salvation ;  for  there  was  no  other  name  given 
whereby  we  must  be  saved.  To  him  they  must 
submit,  and  in  him  they  must  believe,  because  he 
was,  by  the  wise  and  benevolent  appointment  of 
God,  the  immoveable  stone  on  which  the  Church 
must  be  built.  The  same  truth  is  declared  by  the 
Apostle  Paul,  For  other  foundation  can  no  man 
lay  than  that  is  laid,  zvhich  is  Jesus  Christ, — 
1  Cor.  iii.  11.  So  also  it  is  said,  "  Having  pre- 
destinated us  unto  the  adoption  of  children  by  Je- 
sus Christ  to  himself,  according  to  the  good  pleasure 
©f  his  will,"  Eph.  i.  5,  Here  the  same  foundation 
is  alluded  to  as  in  the  former  text, — Christ  Jesus  ; 


APPENDIX  *sy 

and  the  predestination  of  God  in  regard  to  their 
adoption  by  Christ  Jesus,  plainly  shews  that  the 
Apostle  meant  to  establish  the  general  principle, 
agreeably  to  which  souls  should  be  saved  ;  and  all 
this  according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  his  will. 

The  Jews  hoped  for  salvation  by  the  law  of  Mo- 
ses, by  outward  ceremonies,  by  external  purifica- 
tions, &e.  and  the  gentiles  hoped  for  salvation  by 
their  philosophy,  their  altars,  temples,  and  gods  : 
the  one  looked  upon  Christ  as  preached  by  the 
Apostles,  as  a  stone  of  stumbling  and  rock  ofof- 
fencc ;  the  other  considered  the  preaching  of  the 
cross  as  foolishness  :  to  both  the  Apostles  declare, 
that  their  hopes  were  vain,  their  foundation  was  in 
the  sand ;  and  therefore  they  must  relinquish  all  de- 
pendence, each  in  their  favourite  peculiarities ; 
and  submit  to  the  only  sure  foundation,  which  God, 
according  to  his  wise  determination  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world,  had  laid.  This  truth,  re- 
specting the  medium  of  reconciliation  to  God,  was 
as  a  two-edged  sword,  equally  cutting  asunder 
the  delusive  hopes  of  Jews  and  Gentiles. 

How  sublime,  and  how  glorious  does  the  predes- 
tination of  God  appear,  when  viewed  in  this  point. 
of  light  !  No  lowering  clouds  of  eternal  wrath 
against  reprobated  millions,  appear  to  darken  the 
sky  of  Gospel  truth.  No  narrow  rivulet  of  electing 
love  runs  through  the  plain  of  human  misery,  mere- 
ly to  quench  the  thirst  of  a  few  favoured  souls. 
But  the  luminous  rays  of  divine  light  from  the  Sun 
of  righteousness,  are  widely  diffused  throughout  the 


300  APPENDIX. 

horizon  of  the  moral  world ;  and  the  broad  river  of 
redeeming  love,  widening  as  it  majestically  flows 
along,  is  sufficiently  capacious  to  satisfy  the  "  rag- 
ing thirst"  of  all  the  perishing  sons  of  fallen  man* 
How  delightful  to  behold  a  smiling  God  in  the  face 
of  Jesus  Christ,  with  arms  of  benevolence  extend- 
ed to  all  the  human  race,  ready  to  infold  them  with 
paternal  love !  No  thundering  voice  of  vengeance, 
of  eternal  vengeance,  is  heard  to  echo  from  the  ele- 
vated mount  of  redeeming  love,  to  those  objects  of 
eternal  hatred,  whom  the  Hopkinsians  suppose  God 
had  consigned  to  eternal  darkness,  before  "  old 
chaos  and  ancient  night"  existed.  If  this  alarming 
voice  is  ever  heard,  it  will  be  heard  from  a  throne 
of  inflexible  justice,  rendered  more  resplendent,  by 
the  reflecting  rays  of  uncreated  goodness,  (though 
somewhat  veiled  by  the  abuses  it  has  received  by 
the  obstinate  sinner)  roaring  through  the  ears  of  all 
heaven,  who  will  approbate  the  righteous  sentence, 
by  a  loud  Amen  to  the  sentence  of  condemnation. 
No  arbitrary  act  this.  But  an  act  required  by  the 
immutable  law  of  justice,  from  whose  righteous  pe- 
nalty goodness  itself  could  not  persuade  the  har- 
dened sinner  to  exempt  himself  in  the  day  of  his 
merciful  visitation.  My  heart  trembles  while  think- 
ing and  writing  upon  this  awful  subject.  May  God 
of  his  infinite  mercy,  save  the  sinner  from  experi- 
encing the  just  sentence  of  eternal  condemnation. 
But,  methinks  I  see  the  rigid  predestinanan,  with 
marks  of  disatisfaction  on  his  countenance,  advan- 
cing with  his  bible  under  his  arm.     To  that  sacred 


APPENDIX.  301 

took  I  would  bow  with  all  due  respect :  to  its  dic- 
tates my  soul  would  submit,  as  to  an  oracle  divine. 
He  turns  over  its  leaves,  and  thus  renews  his  objec- 
tions. "  Sir,  you  have  said,  that  the  doctrine  of 
election  and  reprobation,  so  often  introduced  to  the 
readers'  notice  in  this  blessed  book,  relates  to  na- 
tions and  communities,  and  not  to  individuals.  To 
convince  you  of  your  mistake,  I  produce  you  the 
case  of  Pharaoh,  which  the  Apostle  Paul  mentions 
with  peculiar  emphasis,  in  the  ninth  chapter  of  his 
espistle  to  the  Romans.  This  instance  certainly 
affords  a  striking  proof  of  personal  reprobation; 
and  I  thence  conclude,  that  if  one  individual  may 
have  been  selected  as  an  object  of  eternal  reproba- 
tion, why  not  millions  ?" 

Truly — If  indeed  it  can  be  proved  that  Pharaoh 
was  eternally  reprobated  to  everlasting  misery, 
without  any  respect  to  his  works  foreseen,  it  would 
be  no  contemptible  proof  in  favour  of  your  doctrine. 
But  it  is  presumed,  that  is  a  point  taken  for  granted 
without  sufficient  proof. 

To  be  convinced  whether  this  be  so  or  not,  let  us 
impartially  examine  those  passages  which  have  giv- 
en birth  to  that  opinion.  "  Even  for  this  same  pur- 
pose have  I  raised  thee  up,  that  I  might  shew  my 
poiver  in  thee,  and  that  my  name  might  he  declared 
throughout  all  the  earth."  And  do  you  conclude 
that  this  same  purpose  for  which  Pharaoh  was  raised 
up,  was,  that  he  might  be  eternally  d<    trdyed  ? 

Does  not  this  conclusion  originate  from  inatten- 
tion to  the  subject  ?  The  Apostle,  so  far  from  af- 
c  c 


30-2  APPENDIX. 

firming  that  God's  purpose  concerning  the  Egyp- 
tian king,  was  to  destroy  him  for  ever,  explicity  de- 
clares that  his  design  was,  that  his  power  might  be 
shewn,  and  that  his  name  might  be  declared  through- 
out all  the  earth.  How  noble,  how  grand,  this  de- 
sign of  God !  Such  was  the  moral  state  of  the  world 
at  that  time,  as  to  require  some  extraordinary  inter- 
position of  Divine  Providence  to  arouse  them  from 
the  profound  stupor  in  which  they  were,  respecting 
spiritual  and  divine  things.  The  Egyptians,  and 
all  the  surrounding  nations,  sunk  in  the  profoundest 
ignorance  respecting  the  character  of  God,  enslaved 
to  the  most  shameful  sensualities,  subjected  to  ob- 
scene rites  and  ceremonies  in  their  religious  ser- 
vices, worshipping  idols  which  could  neither  hear 
nor  speak,  needed  some  illustrious  manifestation  of 
the  being  and  attributes  of  the  true  God,  to  convince 
them  of  the  nullity  of  their  imaginary  deities,  the 
dangerous  tendency  of  their  immoral  practices,  and 
the  futility  of  their  contemptible  modes  of  worship. 
The  Israelites  too,  having  been  long  in  bondage  to 
the  Egyptians,  and  no  doubt  assimilating  more  or 
less  to  their  moral  conduct,  faith,  and  modes  of 
worship,  were  not  in  a  condition  to  be  convinced  of 
their  error,  by  argumentation  addressed  to  their 
understandings ;  but  they  also  needed  some  awful 
signals  of  the  majesty  and  power  of  the  true  God, 
to  open  their  eyes,  and  break  their  fond  attachment 
to  Egyptian  customs,  ceremonies,  &c.  Now  to  re- 
move this  veil  which  was  upon  all  flesh,  some  signal 
display  of  the  power  and  goodness  of  the  only  true 


APPENDIX,  303 

and  living  God,  became  necessary.  For  this  pur* 
pose  Pharaoh  zvas  raised  up  from  the  death  which 
would  have  followed  the  plagues  which  were  sent 
upon  him  and  upon  his  people.  That  he  might  en- 
dure them  all  in  succession,  he  had  extraordinary- 
strength  given  him.  Therefore  it  is  said,  /  will 
harden  his  heart. 

"  The  case  of  Pharaoh  has  given  rise  to  many 
fierce  controversies,  and  to  several  strange  and 
conflicting  opinions.  Would  men  but  look  at  the 
whole  account  without  the  medium  of  their  respec- 
tive creeds,  they  would  find  little  difficulty  to  ap- 
prehend  the  truth.  If  we  take  up  the  subject  in  a 
theological  point  of  view,  all  sober  christians  will 
allow  the  truth  of  this  proposition  of  St.  Augustin, 
when  the  subject  in  question  is  a  person  who  has 
hardened  his  own  heart,  by  frequently  resisting  the 
grace  and  Spirit  of  God.  'God  does  not  harden 
men  by  infusing  malice  into  them,  but  by  not  im- 
parting mercy  to  them.'  And  this  other  will  be  as 
readily  credited.  '  God  does  not  work  this  hardness 
of  heart  in  man,  but  he  may  be  said  to  harden  him 
whom  he  refuses  to  soften,  to  blind  him  whom  he  re- 
fuses to  enlighten,  and  to  repel  him  whom  he  re- 
fuses to  call.'  It  is  but  just  and  right  that  he  should 
withhold  those  graces  which  he  had  repeatedly  of- 
fered, and  which  the  sinner  had  despised  and  re- 
jected. Thus  much  for  the  general  principle.-— 
The  verb  ptn  ckazak,  which  we  translate  harden, 
literally  signifies  to  strengthen,  confirm,  make  bold 
or  courageous  :  and  is  often  used  in  the  Sacred  Wri- 
tings, to   excite  to  duty,  perseverance,  &c.   and  is 


304  APPENDIX. 

placed  by  the  Jews  at  the  end  of  most  books  in  the 
Bible,  as  an  exhortation  to  the  reader  to  take  cour- 
age, and  proceed  with  his  reading,  and  with  the 
obedience  it  requires.  It  constitutes  an  essential 
part  of  the  exhortation  of  God  to  Joshua,  ch.  i.  7. 
Only  be  thou  strong,  pin  p"i  rak  chazak.  And  of  Josh- 
ua's dying  exhortation  to  the  people,  ch.  xxiii.  6. 
be  ye  therefore  very  courageous,  Dnptro  ve-cha- 
zaktem,  to  keep  and  to  do  all  that  is  written  in  the 
hook  of  the  law.  Now  it  would  be  very  strange  in 
these  places  to  translate  the  word  harden — Only  he 
thou  hard — Be  ye  therefore  very  hard.  And  yet  if 
we  use  the  word  hardy,  it  would  suit  the  sense  and 
context  perfectly  well :  only  be  thou  hardy — Be  ye 
therefore  very  hardy.  Now  suppose  we  apply  the 
word  in  this  way  to  Pharaoh,  the  sense  would  be 
good,  and  the  justice  of  God  equally  conspicuous. 
1  will  make  his  heart  hardy,  bold,  daring,  presump- 
tuous,— for  the  same  principle  acting  against  God's 
order,  is  presumption  ;  which,  when  acting  accord- 
ing to  it,  is  undaunted  courage.  It  is  true  that  the 
verb  TW)  kashah  is  used,  chap.  vii.  3.  which  signifies 
to,  render  stiff,  tough,  or  stubborn,  but  it  amounts 
(o  nearly  the  same  meaning  with  the  above. 

;-  All  those  who  have  read  the  scriptures  with  care 
and  attention,  well  know  that  God  is  frequently  rep- 
resented in  them  as  doing  what  he  only  permits  to  be 
done.  So  because  a  man  has  grieved  his  Spirit, 
and  resisted  his  grace,  he  withdraws  that  Spirit  and 
iirace  from  him,  and  thus  he  becomes  bold  and  pre- 
sumptuous  in  sin.  Pharaoh  made  his  own  heart 
stubborn  against  God,  chap.  ix.  34.  and  God  gave 


APPENDIX.  305 

him  up  to  judicial  blindness,  so  that  he  rushed  on 
stubbornly  to  his  own  destruction.  From  the  whole 
of  Pharaoh's  conduct  we  learn,  that  he  was  bold, 
haughty,  and  cruel :  and  God  chose  to  permit  these 
dispositions  to  have  their  full  sway  in  his  heart, 
without  check  or  restraint  from  divine  influence  ; 
the  consequence  was  what  God  intended,  he  did 
not  immediately  comply  with  the  requisition  to 
let  the  people  go  :  and  this  was  done  that  God 
might  have  the  fuller  opportunity  of  manifesting 
his  power  by  multiplying  signs  and  miracles ; 
and  thus  impress  the  hearts  both  of  the  Egyptians 
and  Israelites,  with  a  due  sense  of  his  omnipotence 
and  justice.  The  whole  procedure  was  calculated 
to  do  endless  good  to  both  nations.  The  Israelites 
must  be  satisfied  that  they  had  the  true  God  for  their 
protector;  and  thus  their  faith  was  strengthened. — 
The  Egyptians  must  see  that  their  gods  could  do 
nothing  against  the  God  of  Israel,  and  thus  their  de- 
pendence on  them  was  necessarily  shaken.  These 
crreat  ends  could  not  have  been  answered,  had  Pha- 
raoh  at  once  consented  to  let  the  people  go.  This 
consideration  alone  unravels  the  mystery,  and  ex- 
plains every  thing.  Let  it  be  observed,  that  there 
is  nothing  spoken  here  of  the  eternal  state  of  the 
Egyptian  king ;  nor  does  any  thing  in  the  whole  of 
the  subsequent  account  authorize  us  to  believe  that 
God  hardened  his  heart  against  the  influences  of  his 
ozim  grace,  that  he  might  occasion  him  so  to  sin,  that 
his  justice  might  consign  him  to  hell.  This  would  be 
such  an  act  of  flagrant  injustice,  as  we  could  scarce- 
ec2 


306  APPENDIX. 

ly  attribute  to  the  worst  of  men.  He  who  leads 
another  into  an  offence,  that  he  may  have  a 
Cairer  pretence  to  punish  him  for  it  ;  or  brings 
him  into  such  circumstances,  that  he  cannot  avoid 
committing  a  capital  crime,  and  then  hangs  him 
for  it,  is  surely  the  most  execrable  of  mortals. — 
What  then  should  we  make  of  the  God  of  Jus- 
tice and  mercy,  should  we  attribute  to  him  a  de- 
cree, the  date  of  which  is  lost  in  eternity,  by 
which  he  has  determined  t®  cut  off  from  the  possi- 
bility of  salvation,  millions  of  millions  of  unborn 
souls,  and  leave  them  under  a  necessity  of  sinning, 
hy  actually  hardening  their  hearts  against  the  influ- 
ences of  his  own  grace  and  spirit,  that  he  may,  on 
tire  pretext  of  justice,  consign  them  to  endless  per- 
dition ?  Whatever  may  be  pretended  in  behalf  of 
such  unqualified  opinions,  it  must  be  evident  to  all 
who  are  not  deeply  prejudiced,  that  neither  the  jus- 
tice nor  the  sovereignty  of  God  can  be  magnified  by 
•hem."     Dr.  A.  Clarke  on  Exodus  iv.  21. 

It  appears  therefore,  to  have  been  the  design  of 
God,  in  his  awful  transactions  with  Pharaoh  and 
the  Israelites,  to  convince  them  of  his  uncontrolable 
authority  over  the  physical  and  moral  world,  and 
thereby  to  revive  the  knowledge  of  his  own  most 
glorious  character  among  mankind.  This  grand 
design  justified  the  extraordinary  means  which 
were  employed.  And  the  designed  effect,  it  would 
appear,  was  produced  ;  for  when  the  tidings  of  these 
miraculous  events  were  heard,  the  people,  the 
Egyptian?,  and  even  the  Canaanites  greatly  fearedi; 


APPENDIX.  307 

aad  their  hearts  melted  within  them.  '•  1  know  that 
the  Lord  hath  given  you  the  land,  and  that  your 
terror  is  fallen  upon  us,  and  that  all  the  inhabitants 
of  the  land/am/  because  of  you.  For  we  have  heard 
how  the  Lord  dried  up  the  water  of  the  red  sea  for  you 
when  ye  came  out  of  Egypt ;  and  what  ye  did  unto 
the  two  kings  of  the  Amorites,  that  were  on  the  other 
side  Jordan,  Sihon  and  Og,  whom  ye  utterly  des- 
troyed. And  as  soon  as  we  heard  these  things,  our 
hearts  did  melt,  neither  did  there  remain  any  more 
courage  in  any  man  because  of  you  :    for  the  lord 

YOUR  GOD,  HE  IS  GOD  IN  HEAVEN  ABOVE,  AND  IN 

earth  beneath."  Josh.  ii.  9 — 11.  Indeed  all  the 
surrounding  nations  were  struck  with  solemn  awe, 
when  they  heard  what  the  God  of  the  Israelites  had 
done  in  Egypt,  at  the  Red  sea,  at  Sinai,  and  in  the 
wilderness. 

How  much  more  worthy  of  God  were  these  noble 
and  benevolent  ends,  than  to  suppose  Pharaoh  was 
raised  up  from  infancy  to  manhood,  and  then  to  the 
throne  of  Egypt  ;  arid  that  God  positively  hardened 
his  heart  in  wickedness,  merely  to  send  him  to  hell. 
No  such  unworthy  conclusion  is  warranted  from  the 
words  of  the  Apostle,  nor  from  the  narration  of  facts 
respecting  the  dealings  of  God  with  Pharaoh  and 
the  Israelites. 

"  Therefore  hath  he  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have 
mercy,  and  whom  he  will  he  hardeneth,"  Rom.  ix. 
18.  And  is  it  concluded  from  these  words  that 
God  in  an  arbitrary  manner,  raises  some  to  ever- 
lasting life,  and  harcleneth  others  to  everlasting 
death  ?  "  So  it  would  seem," — but  without  sufficient 


tOjB  APPENDIX. 

authority.  Leaving  the  consideration  out  of  the 
question,  that  the  Apostle  was  speaking  in  a  nation- 
al, not  individual  point  of  view,  we  may  have  a  con- 
sistent interpretation  of  these  words,  which  involves 
no  idea  of  unconditional  predestination* 

The  simple  question  is,  On  whom  will  he  have 
mercy  ?  Isaiah  shall  answer — Let  the  wicked  for- 
sake his  way,  and  the  unrighteous  man  his  thoughts  : 
and  let  him  return  unto  the  Lord,  and  he  will  have 
mercy  upon  him,  chap.  lv.  7.  Those  therefore,  on 
whom  the  Lord  will  have  mercy,  are  such  of  the 
wicked  as  forsake  their  way,  and  return  unto  the 
Lord.  But  who  does  the  Lord  will  to  harden  ? — 
Who  indeed  but  such  obstinate  sinners  as  refuse  to 
hearken  to  his  voice,  and  return  unto  him  with  pen- 
itent hearts — those  who,  like  Pharaoh,  first  harden 
themselves,  agreeably  to  the  declaration  of  Solomon, 
"  A  wicked  man  hardeneth  his  face."  Prov.  xxii. 
29.  "  He  that,  being  often  reproved,  hardeneth  his 
neck,  shall  suddenly  be  destroyed,  and  that  with- 
out remedy,'  -  ch.  xxix,  1.  Such  sinners  as  wilful- 
ly resist  the  operations  of  divine  grace,  shall  eat  of 
the  fruit  of  their  own  way,  and  be  filed  with  their 
f>wn  devices,  ch.  i.  31. 

From  this  view  of  the  subject,  we  may  perceive 
*hat  the  Apostle  Paul,  in  the  words  under  conside- 
ration, asserts  the  predestination  for  which  we  con- 
tend :  it  being  according  to  God's  unalterable  coun- 
sel, to  have  mercy  upon  all  who  forsake  their  sins, 
return  unto  him,  and  believe  in  Jesus  Christ :  and 
*o  harden,  by  withholding  the  influences  of  his  Spi- 


APPENDIX.  309 

rit,  all  those  who  first  harden  themselves  in  iniquity 
until  their  day  of  grace  ends  ;  and  finally  to  punish 
them  with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence 
of  God,  and  the  glory  of  his  power, 

"Hath  not  the  potter  power  over  the  clay,  of  the 
same  lump  to  make  one  vessel  unto  honour,  and  ano- 
ther unto  dishonour  ?"  ver.  21 .  Unquestionably. — 
But  who  ever  heard  of  a  Potter,  that  made  a  vessel 
expressly  to  dash  it  to  pieces  !  Such  conduct  in  a 
man  would  indicate  great  folly,  or  great  anger,  or 
both. 

And  is  it  lawful  to  infer  from  these  words,  that 
God  has  made  one  part  of  the  human  family  for  no 
other  purpose  than  to  torment  them  in  hell  for 
ever  ?  The  obvious  meaning  of  the  Apostle  is,  that 
as  the  Potter  makes  some  vessels  for  more  honour- 
able uses  than  he  docs  others,  so  God  has  raised 
some  nations,  the  Jews,  for  instance,  formerly,  and 
now  the  Gentiles,  who  are  called  to  the  exalted 
privileges  of  Christianity,  to  higher  dignity,  and  for 
more  honourable  purposes,  than  he  has  others. — 
The  Jevjs,  who  were  called  to  be  God's  peculiar 
people,  in  distinction  from  other  nations,  were,  in 
consequence  of  their  national  and  church  privileges, 
more  honourable  than  their  neighbours.  These  fa- 
vours were  not  granted  them  beeause  they  were  bet- 
ter by  nature  than  others,  but  were  bestowed  ac- 
cording to  the  sovereign  pleasure  of  God  ;  who  de- 
manded an  improvement  proportionate  to  the  fa- 
vours thus  granted  them.  Note,  the  Gentiles,  who 
are  called  to  the  exalted  blessings  of  Christianity, 


310  APPENDIX. 

are  more  highly  honoured  than  the  Jews,  Mokam* 
idans,  or  Pagans  ;  for  the  use  of  which  blessings 
they  are  responsible  to  God.  But  it  does  not  fol- 
low from  hence,  that  all  those  who  live  under  the 
light  of  the  Gospel,  are  elected  to  everlasting  life, 
nor  that  all  others  are  reprobated  to  eternal  burn- 
ings. There  were  doubtless  many  among  the  Jews 
formerly,  who  were  included  among  God's  chosen 
people  upon  earth,  that  reprobated  themselves,  by 
abusing  the  mercies  they  enjoyed :  and  no  doubt 
also,  but  many  of  the  Gentiles,  who  wisely  improved 
the  day  of  their  merciful  visitation,  were  graciously 
saved  with  life  everlasting,  See  Rom.  ii.  13 — 15.-— 
And  so  also  there  may  be  many  who  are  now  exalt- 
ed to  the  invaluable  blessings  of  the  Gospel  church, 
will  finally  reprobate  themselves  by  their  disobe- 
dience. Moreover,  it  would  appear,  that  even 
some  of  these  vessels  of  dishonour  may  become  ves- 
sels of  honour.  "  But  in  a  great  house  there  are 
ttot  only  vessels  of  gold  and  of  silver,  but  also  of 
wood  and  of  earth,  and  some  to  honour,  and  some 
to  dishonour,  n  a  man  therefore  purge  himself 
from  these,  he  shall  be  &  vessel  unto  honour,  sancti- 
fied, and  meet  for  the  master's  use,  and  prepared 
«nto  every  good  work,"  2  Tim.  ii.  20,  21.  From 
this  text,  it  is  manifest  that  those  who  are  compara- 
tively dishonourable,  may,  by  purging  themselves 
from  sinful  passions,  become  vessels  of  honour, 
and  shine,  like  gold  and  silver,  in  the  Church  of 
God. 


APPENDIX.  311 

u  What  if  God,  willing  to  shew  his  wrath,  and  to 
make  his  power  known,  endureth  with  much  long- 
suffering  the  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  to  destruction," 
ver.  22.  On  reading  these  words,  those  who  have 
been  educated  in  the  school  of  unconditional  pre- 
destination, conclude  that  these  vessels  of  wrath  are 
fitted  to  destruction,  under  the  influence  of  an  eter- 
nal decree  of  reprobation  :  hence  the  long-suffering 
of  which  the  Apostle  speaks,  is  entirely  overlooked. 
But,  who  are  thus  fitted  to  destruction  ?  Paul,  speak- 
ing of  the  wicked  who  seek  not  after  God,  whose 
mouth  is  full  of cursing  and  bitterness,  adds,  "Des- 
truction and  misery  are  in  their  ways  :  and  the  way 
of  peace  have  they  not  known,"  Rom.  iii.  16,  17. 
4*  Is  not  destruction  to  the  wicked,  and  a  strange  pun- 
ishment to  the  workers  of  iniquity  .?"  Job.  xxxi.  3. 
"  Pride  goeth  before  destruction,  and  an  haughty 
spirit  before  a  fall."  Prov.  xvi.  18.  We  see 
therefore  how  sinners  are  fitted  to  destruction;  not 
indeed  by  an  act  of  God  ;  but  for  refusing  to  seek 
after  God-,  for  not  knowing  the  way  of  peace,  when 
they  might  have  known  it,  for  being  -wicked,  and  for 
indulging  in  pride,  and  an  haughty  contempt  of 
the  long-suffcj'iyig  of  God. 

This  long-suffering,  which  was  exercised  towards 
these  characters,  who  are  thus  self-fitted  to  destruc- 
tion, is  designed  to  lead  them  to  repentance  and  sal- 
vation. "  Or  despisest  thou  the  riches  of  his  good- 
ness and  forbearance,  and  long-suffering  ;  not  know- 
ing that  the  goodness  of  God  leadelh  thee  to  repent- 
ance," Rom.  ii.  4.     "  And  account  that  the  long- 


312  APPENDIX. 

suffering  of  the  Lord  is  salvation;  even  as  our  be- 
loved brother  Paul  also,  according  to  the  wisdom 
given  unto  him,  hath  written  unto  you,"  2  Pet.  iii. 
15.  So  that,  even  these  -vessels  of  wrath,  upon 
whom  God  will  finally  shew  his  wrath,  and  make 
his  power  known,  were  once  objects  of  his  long- 
suffering,  and  consequently  within  the  possibility 
•f  salvation. 

"  Go  and  tell  this  people,  Hear  ye  indeed,  but 
understand  not ;  and  see  ye  indeed,  but  perceive 
not.  Make  the  heart  of  this  people  fat,  and  make 
their  ears  heavy,  and  shut  their  eyes  ;  lest  they  see 
with  their  eyes,  and  hear  with  their  ears,  and  un- 
derstand with  their  heart,  and  convert  and  be  heal- 
ed," Isaiah  vi.  9,  10.  From  these  words  it  is  con- 
cluded by  some,  that  the  design  of  the  Prophet's 
mission  to  the  Jews  was,  absolutely  to  make  them 
the  more  hard  in  iniquity^  thereby  to  prevent  their 
conversion.  But  in  the  language  of  the  Hebrews, 
the  agent  is  frequently  said  to  do  things,  which  he 
<anly  predicts  will  be  done,  or  simply  declares  is  al- 
ready done.  So  the  Lord  says  to  Jeremiah,  "  See, 
I  have  this  day  set  thee  over  the  nations,  and  over 
the  kingdoms,  to  root  out,  and  to  pull  down,  and  to 
destroy,  and  to  throw  down,  to  build  and  to  plant," 
ch.  i.  10.  Now  it  is  certain  that  Jeremiah  was  not 
sent  in  his  own  person,  to  overturn  nations  and  king- 
doms, to  root  out,  pull  down,  and  destroy  cities  and 
villages,  to  build  houses,  z.nd  plant  vineyards  :  but 
he  was  sent  to  declare,  or  predict  that  these  judg- 
ments would  come  upon  those  communities,  for  their 


APPENDIX.  313 

wickedness  against  God.  So  also  the  Apostle  Paul 
saith,  the  saints  shall  judge  the  world — that  is,  they 
shall  declare  the  just  judgments  of  God  against  a 
wicked  world.  This  key  will  open  the  meaning  of 
the  above  words  of  Isaiah.  God  sent  him  to  declare 
unto  the  iniquitous  Jews,  that  their  hearts  were  fat, 
that  their  ears  were  heavy,  and  that  their  eyes  were 
shut ;  and  that,  consequently,  they  would  not  see 
with  their  eyes,  hear  with  their  ears,  nor  understand 
with  their  hearts ;  and  therefore,  so  long  as  this 
was  the  case,  they  could  not  be  converted  and  heal- 
ed. Is  not  this  a  plain,  scriptural,  and  rational  so- 
lution of  the  diinculty  which  appears  upon  the  face 
of  the  text  ? 

"  But  these,  as  natural  brute  beasts,  made  to  be 
taken  and  destroyed,  speak  evil  of  the  things  they 
understand  not ;  and  shall  utterly  perish  in  their 
own  corruption,"  2  Pet.  ii.  12.  From  hence  it  is 
inferred,  that  those  sinners  of  which  the  Apostle 
speaks,  were  made  expressly  to  be  taken  by  sin  and 
Satan,  and  then  eternally  destroyed.  But  is  it  not 
the  natural  brute  beasts,  which  the  Apostle  says  were 
made  to  be  taken  and  destroyed  ?  and  that  those  wick- 
ed men,  who,  like  the  Sodomites,  resembled  brute 
beasts,  by  walking  after  the  fesh,  in  the  lust  of  un- 
cleanncss,  and  despise  government,  should  iinally 
receive  the  reward  of  unrighteousness,  as  they  that 
count  it  pleasure  to  riot  in  the  day  time.  In  what  a 
contemptible  point  of  light  does  the  opposite  opin- 
ion represent  the  Almighty,  by  saying  that  he  brings 
some  sinners  into  existence,  in  order  to  lead  tlicm 

D    d 


311  APPENDIX. 

into  the  snares  of  sin,  that  they  might  be  fattened 
for  the  day  of  slaughter,  and  finally  devoured  like 
natural  brute  beasts!  Surely  this  could  not  be  the 
meaning  of  the  holy  Apostle.  Besides,  it  would 
appear  that  the  persons  spoken  of,  were  apostates, 
11  Having  forsaken  the  right  way,  and  are  gone  astray, 
following  the  way  of  Balaam,  the  son  of  Bosor,  who 
loved  the  wages  of  unrighteousness,"  verse  15. 
Were  reprobates  ever  in  the  right  way  ? 

"  For  there  are  certain  men  crept  in  unawares, 
who  were  before  of  old  ordained  to  this  condemna- 
tion," Jude  verse  4.  If  a  correct  translation  of  this 
passage  had  been  given,  it  never  could  have  been 
produced  to  support  unconditional  predestination. 
UocXai  <nzcfi~$ccp pivot,  (Palai  progegrammenoi)  the 
words  here  rendered  before  of  old  ordained,  literally 
signify,  of  old,  before  written  :  for  wfo/WVa/A/^vot,  comes 
from  wgo,  before,  and  y§otQv,  to  write,  or  y^a/u^a,  "  a 
letter,  or  character  of  literal  writing."*  It  was  not 
the  persons,  which  were  identified  in  the  time  of 
Jude  to  the  condemnation  before  written,  but  their 
character.  It  being  the  immutable  determination 
of  God  to  punish  all  ungodly  characters,  in  every 
age  of  the  world,  he  ordered  this  determination  to  be 
recorded,  or  written,  of  old,  long  before  the  days  of 
Jude  ;  and  to  this  revealed  and  written  determina- 
tion of  God,  St.  Jude  appeals,  to  shew  that  his  dec- 
larations concerning  the  punishment  of  such  ungod- 
ly characters,  were  predicated  of  truth,  the  immuta- 
ble truth  of  God, 

*  Parkhurst. 


APPENDIX.  3la 

We  often  err  in  the  interpretation  of  authors,  by 
not  attending  to  the  time,  place,  and  circumstances 
of  their  writing.  These  things  ought  especially  to 
be  kept  in  mind  when  we  read  the  sacred  scrip- 
tures. When  the  Apostles  were  sent  out  to  preach 
the  glad  tidings  of  salvation  through  Jesus  Christ, 
they  proposed  a  system  of  religion,  to  which  the 
Gentiles  especially,  and  the  Jews  also,  in  a  great 
measure,  were  strangers.  In  propagating  their 
doctrine,  they  used  tcnns  which  were  found  in  the 
Greek  language,  and  which  were  well  understood 
by  the  Greeks  themselves,  to  convey  certain  appro- 
priate ideas,  respecting  their  system  of  theology ; 
but  which,  when  incorporated  by  the  Apostles  into 
the  Christian  phraseology,  were  used  in  a  different 
sense.  It  cannot  be  supposed  they  used  the  words 
e.<o>,  (Theos)  God^UiT^  (Pistis)  Faith,  So^a, (Sophia) 
Wisdom,  Ayios,  (Agios)  Holy,  in  the  same  sense  in 
which  the  Heathen  philosophers  did  :  but  they  at- 
tached a  higher,  and  more  dignified  meaning  to 
them.  It  is  well  known  that  most  of  the  Heathen 
philosophers  believed  and  taught  the  doctrine  of 
fate,  especially  those  who  professed  to  believe  in 
the  eternity  of  matter,  &c.  Hence  the  terms  which 
they  used  in  their  theology  to  signify  that  fatality 
which  was  supposed  to  preside  over  the  affairs  of 
men,  were  adopted  and  used  by  the  Apostles  ;  but 
unquestionably  they  used  them  in  a  different  sense 
from  what  the  Heathen  philosophers  used  them. — 
Thus  the  word  0$fyt  (oriso)  which  signifies  to  bound, 
limit,  decree,  set,  or  appoint,  and  was  used  by  the 


31$  APPENDIX. 

profane  writers  according  to  its  literal  import, 
when  they  applied  it  to  the  fates  of  men,  of  com- 
munities, and  individuals,  was  not  used  by  the 
New-Testament  writers  to  signify  that  all  the  ac- 
tions of  every  individual,  were  decreed,  bounded, 
and  limited  by  an  irrevocable  decree  of  God,  re- 
specting those  actions ;  but  when  it  was  used  to 
designate  the  decree,  or  appointment  of  the  Al- 
mighty, it  related,  as  I  have  before  observed,  to 
his  immutable  designs,  in  regard  to  the  method  of 
salvation  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  qualifications  for 
heaven. 

From  not  attending  to  these  obvious  truths,  some 
Christian  writers  have  unwarrantably  degraded  the 
sublime  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  of  the  Son  of  God, 
levelling  them  to  the  contemptible  subtleties  of 
heathen  philosophy ;  thereby  imperceptibly  cor- 
rupting the  minds  of  christians  from  that  pure  and 
simple  form  of  doctrine,  which  was  first  delivered 
to  the  saints,  by  Christ  and  his  Apostles.  By  this 
means  also,  man  is  reduced  to  the  level  of  a  brute 
or  a  stone,  in  regard  to  praise  or  blame — being  di- 
vested of  that  distinguishing  and  noble  endowment, 
power  to  will  and  to  act,  he  is  reduced  to  the  fatal  ne- 
cessity of  being  acted  upon  by  an  irresistible  influ- 
ence, in  order  to  act  ;  and  of  being  compelled  in  all 
he  does,  in  all  cases  and  circumstances.  By  the 
same  injudicious  method,  God,  the  author  of  all 
good,  is  represented  in  the  character  of  a  cruel  des* 
pot,  who  has  ordained  one  line  of  conduct  for  his 
intelligent  creatures,  but  commanded  another ;   and 


APPENDIX.  317 

who  punishes  with  everlasting  destruction  a  part  of 
his  creatures,  who  exactly  fulfil  the  counsel  of  his 
will !  Sucli  unbecoming  views  of  the  divine  charac- 
ter and  government,  must  have  originated  from  a 
misunderstanding  of  his  gracious  designs,  and  a 
misapplication  of  the  terms  used  by  the  inspired 
writers. 

Laying  aside  such  unworthy  thoughts  of  God, 
and  viewing  him  in  the  light  of  scripture  and  en- 
lightened reason,   which  unfold  him  as  a  being  of 
untarnished    rectitude,    of  boundless   wisdom    and 
benevolence,  of  infinite  justice  and  goodness,  whose 
governing  influence   is   exercised  over  a  world  of 
free,  responsible  intelligences  ;  and  whose  righteous 
laws,  founded  in  the  immutable  nature  and  fitness 
of  things,  are  in  perfect  correspondence  to  his  de- 
crees, both  revealed  for  the   regulation   of  man's 
conduct.     From  this  scriptural  and  rational  view  of 
things,  we  see  a  broad  basis,  an  immoveable  rock, 
on  which  we  may  stand,  and  beseech  sinners  to  be 
reconciled  to    God,     Some,   however,  may  object, 
that  the  conflicting  opinions   of  the  different  sects 
of  professing   Christians,   presents   an  impassable 
barrier  in  their  way.     But  why  should  these  things 
stagger  your  faith  in  the  reality  of  Christianity,  any 
more    than  the  different  opinions  prevalent  among 
philosophers  and  astronomers,  should  excite  doubts 
respecting  the  truth  and  reality  of  those  sciences  ? 
It  is  not  the  province  of  any  one  man  to  know  all 
the  truth  relating  to  any  one  science  :  and  therefore 
men  may  very  innocently  differ  respecting  some 
d  d  2 


313  APPENDIX. 

points,  without  any  diminution  of  brotherly  affec- 
tion, or  without  undermining  the  main  pillar  of 
truth.  We  all  agree,  That  there  is  a  God,  that  Je- 
sus Christ  died  for  sinners,  and  that  mankind  are 
fallen  beings  ;  and  that  consequently  men  must  be 
born  again  in  order  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
God.  These  truths  are  clearly  revealed  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  and  unequivocally  taught  by  the 
greater  part  of  those  denominations  who  profess  to 
be  Christians.  So  far  then,  all  is  plain  and  easy. — 
Improve  according  to  the  light  and  opportunities 
you  have,  and  what  is  now  dark  and  mysterious, 
will  become  light  and  perspicuous.  To  obtain  vic- 
tory in  argument,  to  silence  an  antagonist  in  debate 
is  a  matter  of  minor  importance  to  the  obtaining 
victory  over  sin,  and  triumphing  over  the  corrup- 
tions of  our  own  hearts.  Against  these  internal 
foes,  we  ought  therefore  to  bend  ourselves  with  all 
our  might ;  knowing  that  we  shall  be  vanquished, 
unless  aided  by  Jesus  Christ,  the  author  and  Jinisher 
of  our  faith. 

Let  us  then,  for  a  moment,  lay  aside  the  weapons 
of  controversy,  with  which  we  have  been  combat- 
ing errors  of  doctrine,  and  enter  into  a  close  invest- 
igation of  our  own  hearts.  Our  shouts  of  victory 
are  unseasonable,  unless  they  are  accompanied  with 
humility,  faith,  love  to  God,  to  our  fellow  men  who 
may  differ  from  us  in  some  sentimental  points,  as 
well  as  those  of  our  own  party — and  with  a  victory 
over  our  own  hearts.  Have  we  ever  been  convin- 
ced of  sin,  so  as  to  see  its  heinous  nature  ?    Has 


APPENDIX.  319 

this  produced  a  godly  sorrow,  and  a  renunciation  of 
those  evils  which  rendered  repentance  necessary  ? 
Have  we  been  led  by  faith  to  Jesus  Christ,  as  our 
only  refuge  in  the  day  of  trouble  ?  Do  we  now  feel 
that  we  have  peace  with  God;  and  are  pressing  for- 
ward after  higher  attainments  of  Christian  know- 
ledge, and  experience  ?  Can  we  demonstrate  to 
the  world  the  truth  and  reality  of  our  religion,  by 
our  sober,  faithful,  holy,  and  upright  lives,  by  an 
honest  attention  to  all  our  lawful  avocations  ?  Does 
the  purity  and  excellence  of  religion  thus  shine 
forth  in  our  daily  walk  and  conversation  ? 

It  is  good  to  have  our  judgments  accurately  in- 
formed respecting  divine  truth  ;  but  unless  this 
truth  influence  our  hearts,  we  shall  be  none  the  bet- 
ter for  it  at  last.  "  With  the  heart  man  believeth 
unto  righteousness,  and  with  the  mouth  confession 
is  made  unto  salvation."  If  this  publication  should 
so  stir  up  the  flame  of  controversy,  as  to  extinguish 
love  to  God  and  man,  I  should  repent  of  my  labour, 
and  miss  the  main  object  of  writing.  Let  us  hold 
fast  the  form  of  sound  words,  earnestly  contend  for 
the  pure  system  of  truth  ;  but  let  us  do  it  with  meek- 
ness and  respect,  confirming  our  love,  even  towards 
those  who  may  differ  from  us  in  some  speculative 
points,  which  are  deemed  of  importance.  But  that 
which  is  the  most  important,  is  a  full  deliverance 
from  sin,  and  a  perfect  conformity  to  the  divine 
image  of  righteousness  and  true  holiness*  May  we 
so  speak  and  so  do,  as  they  that  shall  be  judged  by 
the  law  of  liberty.     Amen. 


X 


CONTENTS. 


LETTER  I. 

6N    FOREORDINATION. 

Reasons  for  writing,  13 — General  examination  of  Mr.  Wil- 
liston's  text,  and  his  comment,  15 — The  doctrine  of  fore- 
ordination  militates  1.  against  the  justice  of  God,  18 — 2. 
against  his  wisdom,  21 — 3.  his  holiness,  26 — 4.  his  goodness,  ib. 
— 5.  his  truth,  28 — and  6.  against  his  immutability,  30.  An 
examination  of  those  scriptures  quoted  by  Mr.  W.  to  prove 
his  doctrine  of  foreordination,  31 — Positive  scripture  proof 
ag'ainst  that  doctrine,  51— The  doctrine  of  particular  prov- 
idence not  peculiar  to  Hopkinsianism  :  God  governs  the 
world  in  wisdom  and  goodness,  54 — Sin  not  for  the  greatest 
good  of  the  universe,  58— God  is  pleased  with  his  work,  but 
not  with  sin,  63 — Hopkinsianism  not  of  divine  origin,  64. 

LETTER  II. 

ON    TOTAL    DEPRAVITY. 

The  author  presumes  the  question  misstated,  67"-  The  true 
point  in  debate  stated,  71 — Scriptural  arguments  tending  to 
prove  that  sinners  are  not  totally  depraved  until  justified, 
73 — Remark  on  Mr.  VWs  interpretation  of  Rom.  v.  18.  84 — 
He  gives  up  the  point,  88 — An  examination  of  his  text,  with 
his  comment ;  the  doctrine  of  total  depravity  not  deducible 
from  that  text,  according  to  his  view  of  the  subject,  and  from 
his  ideas  of  regeneration,  90 — Methodist  sentiments  on  the 
doctrine  of  human  depravity,  93. 


322  CONTENTS. 

LETTER  III. 

ON    ELECTION. 

Election  does  not  depend  on  -works  as  its  causet  97 — The 
principal  design  of  the  Apostle  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans, 
98— Shocking  idea  of  Mr.  W.'s  respecting  Esau,  105— He 
beats  the  air,  108—  Explanation  of  the  word  reprobate,  110 — 
Reasons  why  sinners  are  damned,  11 1 — A  remark  on  his  mo- 
desty, 113— He  is  mistaken  respecting  Paul's  having  obtained 
mercy  because  of  the  greatness  of  his  sin,  114— An  interpre- 
tation of  those  scriptures  brought  by  Mr.  W.  to  prove  his 
doctrine  of  election,  115— Consequences  of  his  doctrine  ;  it 
lestroys  accountability,  132 — Hopkinsian  views  of  an  indis- 
position to  do  good  unscriptural,  irrational,  and  contrary  to 
experience,  134 — In  what  free-agency  consists,  136 — His  doc- 
trine puts  a  reasonable  complaint  into  the  mouth  of  all  infidels 
and  sinners,  137 — It  makes  God  appear  partial,  139 — It  en- 
courages sin,  and  a  neglect  of  the  means  of  grace,  143 — and 
therefore  it  cannot  be  a  bible  doctrine,  152. 

LETTER  IV. 

ON    CHRISTIAN    PERFECTION. 

Mr.  W.  misrepresents  the  Methodist  doctrine  of  perfec- 
tion ;  this  proved  by  quotations  from  their  Discipline,  153 — 
Those  scriptures  brought  by  him  to  support  his  doctrine  of 
"  sinful  imperfection,"  explained  and  harmonized  with  other 
passages,  and  a  particular  examination  of  the  7th  of  Romans, 
158 — The  doctrine  of  Christian  perfection  stated  and  proved, 
183 — Mr.  VV.  gives  up  the  point  in  his  interpretation  of  1  John 
iii.  9.  187 — Christians  must  keep  the  commandments,  188 — 
Hopkinsianism  productive  of  infidelity,  189 — The  doctrine  of 
perfection  proved  from  examples,  193 — From  the  consideration 
that  God's  work  is  perfect,  195 — Mr.  W's  arguments  by  which 
he  attempts  to  shew  the  utility  of  sin  in  the  hearts  of  believers, 
examined  and  shewn  unscriptural  and  inconclusive,  197 — 


CONTENTS.  3S3 

Inference  retorted,  209 — Unlimited  perfection,  not  scriptural, 
211 — His  docirine  self-contradictory,  one  part  being  subver- 
sive of  the  other,  ibid— The  candid  reader  invited  to  deter- 
mine for  himself,  212. 


LETTER  V. 

ON    THE    POSSIBILITY    OF    FALLING    TROM    GRACE. 

The  author  chooses  to  confine  himself  principally  to  scrip- 
ture testimony  for  the  proof  of  this  point,  215 — In  the  first 
place,  however,  Mr.  W.'s  ideas  on  the  covenant  of  redemption, 
are  examined,  and  shewn  erroneous,  216 — His  misapplied 
scriptures  explained.  217 — Those  passages  which  speak  on 
the  subject  of  redemption  considered,  220 — The  atonement 
is  the  work  of  redemption,  225 — An  objection  answered, 
223  -Perseverance  conditional,  229, — proved  from  a  text  Mr. 
W.  quoted  to  prove  it  unconditional,  231 — The  possibility  of 
a  saint's  falling,  established  from  explicit  testimony  of  scrip- 
tuie,  232 — Mr.  W.  acknowledges  that  salvation  is  conditional, 
and  therefore  gives  up  the  point  in  debate,  235 — A  christian 
may  not  only  fall  from  a  profession,  but  also  from  real  godli- 
ness, 235— Objection  answered,  237 — Farther  proof  that  a 
Christian  may  fall  from  real  godliness,  239 — Unhappy  tend- 
ency of  Mr  W's  doctrine,  244 — Comfortless,  245 — Danger- 
ous, 24-7 — It  renders  useless  a  great  part  of  the  bible,  249 — 
His  misapplicatian  of  scripture,  251 — An  objection  answer 
ed— 252. 

LETTER  VI. 

ANIMADVERSIONS    ON    MR.  W.'s    SERMON    RESPECTING 
THE    MINISTERS    OF    SATAN,  &C. 

His  contradictory  assertions,  257 — A  sample  of  Satan's  doc- 
trine, 258 — His  religion  suited  to  the  taste  of  depraved 
sinners,  260 ;— and  has  a  deceptive  influence,  261 — Satan  will 


324  CONTENTS. 

influence  his  ministers  to  slander  the  ministers  of  Christ,  262 
— The  author  apologizes  for  the  preceding  remarks,  263 — 
Concerning  false  conversions,  264 — Marks  of  a  genuine  con- 
version,—its  evidence  three-fold,  266 — Disinterested  benevo- 
lence, not  a  bible  doctrine,  269 — To  be  willing  to  be  damned, 
inconsistent,  270. 


CONCLUSION. 

A  recapitulation  of  some  of  the  preceding  doctrines.  The 
incompatibility  of  the  doctrine  of  fore-ordination,  with  free- 
agency,  277 — It  destroys  all  distinction  between  virtue  and 
vice,  278, — makes  void  the  law,  279, — and  the  Gospel,  280 — 
The  doctrine  of  unconditional  election  incompatible  with  the 
universality  of  the  atonement,  281 — Remarks  on  "moral  ina- 
bility," and  the  absurdity,  on  the  Hopkinsian  plan,  of  inviting 
all  to  come  to  Christ,  282— Methodist  ministry  vindicated, 
288— Scriptural  view  of  divine  truth,  294— Under  this  view  of 
the  subject,  the  author  takes  his  leave  of  controversy  for  the 
present,  with  a  profession  of  love  to  liis  opponent,  and  for 
all  men,  295. 

APPENDIX. 

Predestination,  in  what  it  consists,  297 — The  case  of  Pha- 
raoh an  explanation  of  Rom  ix  17.  30! — On  whom  the  Lord 
will  have  mercy,  and  whom  he  wills  to  harden,  from  verse  18, 
307 — Vessels  of  honour  and  dishonour,  ver.  21,  309 — Vessels 
of  wrath  fitted  to  destruction,  ver.  22,  311 — An  explanation  of 
Isaiah  vi.  9,  10,  312.— Explanation  of  2  Peter  ii.  12,  313— 
Also  of  Jude,  ver.  4,  314—  Reasons  why  we  err  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  scripture,  315 — From  a  scriptural  view  of  God's 
character,  a  foundation  is  laid  on  which  ministers  may  stand 
and  exhort  sinners,  317— Victory  over  sin  the  most  impor- 
tant, 318. 


\ 


